Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31016089›Full record

ArticleCureus2019

Appropriateness of American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Guidelines for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Prospective Analytical Study.

Susan Rajan, Anandhi Amaranathan, Subitha Lakshminarayanan, Sathasivam Sureshkumar, Manoj Joseph, Vishnu Prasad Nelamangala Ramakrishnaiah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Susan RajanSurgery, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, IND.
Anandhi AmaranathanSurgery, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, IND.
Subitha LakshminarayananPreventive Medicine, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, IND.
Sathasivam SureshkumarSurgery, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, IND.
Manoj JosephBiochemistry, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, IND.
Vishnu Prasad Nelamangala RamakrishnaiahSurgery, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Extensive use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) with the advent of open access centers has resulted in inappropriate endoscopies. Our study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines for UGE and to assess the diagnostic yield of endoscopy in a tertiary care center in South India. Methods The study was conducted as a prospective analytical study. Indications for endoscopy were classified as "ASGE appropriate" and "ASGE inappropriate". The significance of association of ASGE guidelines and other categorical variables with endoscopic findings were assessed. Results ASGE appropriate indications and inappropriate indications accounted for 85.9% and 14.1% of endoscopies, respectively. The most common appropriate indication was persistent dyspepsia despite adequate proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (28.1%) and the only inappropriate indication for endoscopy was isolated dyspepsia without adequate PPI therapy (14.1%). The diagnostic yield of endoscopy for appropriate indications was 69.5% and for inappropriate indications was 55.1%, the difference was statistically significant (P= 0.003; OR-1.857). The sensitivity and specificity of ASGE guidelines was 88.5% and 19.5%, respectively. Conclusion According to our study, ASGE guidelines may be considered as appropriate guidelines for UGE in our population and these guidelines were followed 85.9% of the times in referring patients for the same. However, the high diagnostic yield even in inappropriate endoscopies indicates the necessity of further studies that might identify other relevant indications for endoscopy, thus avoiding misutilization of resources without missing out on relevant cases.

Indexed as

appropriateness of endoscopiesasge guidelinesindications for endoscopiesupper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Identifiers

PMID31016089
PMCPMC6464286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.