ArticleIndian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology2019
Comparison of various prognostic scores in variceal and non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective cohort study.
Article in Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of risk scores in prediction for the clinical outcomes in patients with acute variceal bleeding.Annals of medicine · 2021Pooled it
- ISG Task Force on Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB)-Comparison of Risk Scores in Nonvariceal Bleeding-A Prospective Multicenter Study.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of the ABC score in predicting 30-day mortality in upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding at Muhimbili National Hospital, Tanzania: a single-center retrospective cohort study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- The use of prognostic scales in upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026Article
- Article
- Is There a Role for the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio for Rebleeding and Mortality Risk Prediction in Acute Variceal Bleeding? A Comparative 5-Year Retrospective Study.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Construction and validation of a predictive model for the risk of rebleeding in patients with esophageal and gastric varices hemorrhage.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- The Accuracy of Pre-Endoscopic Scores for Mortality Prediction in Patients with Upper GI Bleeding and No Endoscopy Performed.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- CHAMPS score in predicting mortality of patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023Article
- Child-Pugh Score, MELD Score and Glasgow Blatchford Score to Predict the In-Hospital Outcome of Portal Hypertensive Patients Presenting with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Experience from Tertiary Healthcare System.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Validation of the new ABC score for predicting 30-day mortality in gastrointestinal bleeding.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Article
- Low risk of transmission of SARS-CoV2 and effective endotherapy for gastrointestinal bleeding despite challenges supports resuming optimum endoscopic services.Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver · 2021Observational
- Prognostic value of risk scoring systems for cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Which one scores better?Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2019Article
- The AIMS65 Score is a Superior Predictor of Inhospital Outcomes in Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding of Benign Etiology.Euroasian journal of hepato-gastroenterologyArticle
- An Open-label Randomized Controlled Trial of Early Initiation of Nasogastric Feeding After Endotherapy in Variceal Bleeding: A Proof-of-concept Study.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyArticle
- Outcome of Conservative Therapy in Coronavirus disease-2019 Patients Presenting With Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsVarious prognostic scores like Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (GBS), modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (mGBS), full Rockall score (FRS) including endoscopic findings, clinical Rockall score (CRS), and albumin, international normalized ratio (INR), mental status, systolic blood pressure, age >65 (AIMS65) are used for risk stratification in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The utility of these scores in variceal UGIB (VUGIB) is not well defined. In this prospective study, we aimed to assess the performance of these scores in patients with non-variceal (NVUGIB) and VUGIB.
methodsWe included 1011 patients (during March 2017 and August 2018) including 439 with NVUGIB and 572 VUGIB. Performance of GBS, mGBS, FRS, CRS, and AIMS65 for various outcome measures was analyzed using the area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC).
resultsThe accuracy of prognostic scores in predicting the composite outcome including the need of hospital-based intervention and 42-day mortality was higher in NVUGIB as compared with VUGIB, AUROC: CRS: 0.641 vs. 0.537; FRS: 0.669 vs. 0.625; GBS: 0.719 vs. 0.587; mGBS: 0.711 vs. 0.594; AIMS65: 0.567 vs. 0.548. GBS and mGBS at a cut-off score of 1 had the highest negative predictive value, 91.7% and 91.3%, respectively, for predicting composite outcome in NVUGIB. Similarly, these scores had better accuracy for predicting 42-day rebleeding in NVUGIB as compared to VUGIB, AUROC: CRS: 0.680 vs. 0.537; FRS: 0.698 vs. 0.565; GBS: 0.661 vs. 0.543; mGBS: 0.627 vs. 0.540; AIMS65: 0.695 vs. 0.606.
conclusionThe prognostic scores such as CRS, FRS, GBS, mGBS, and AIMS65 predict the need for hospital-based management, rebleeding, and mortality better among patients with NVUGIB than VUGIB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30830583What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.