Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31083485›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2019

Prediction of Chronic Atrophic Gastritis and Gastric Neoplasms by Serum Pepsinogen Assay: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy.

Chang Seok Bang, Jae Jun Lee, Gwang Ho Baik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Gastric Mucosa Cancer Risk: The Operative Link on Gastritis Assessment Staging System.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2026
    Review
  4. Screening for and surveillance of premalignant conditions of the stomach.Best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Novel biomarkers for early detection of gastric cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Chang Seok BangDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Sakju-ro 77, Chuncheon, Gangwon-do 24253, Korea. csbang@hallym.ac.kr.
Jae Jun LeeInstitute of New Frontier Research, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon 24253, Korea. iloveu59@hallym.or.kr.
Gwang Ho BaikDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Sakju-ro 77, Chuncheon, Gangwon-do 24253, Korea. baikgh@hallym.or.kr.

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea NRF2017M3A9E8033253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Serum pepsinogen assay (sPGA), which reveals serum pepsinogen (PG) I concentration and the PG I/PG II ratio, is a non-invasive test for predicting chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) and gastric neoplasms. Although various cut-off values have been suggested, PG I ≤70 ng/mL and a PG I/PG II ratio of ≤3 have been proposed. However, previous meta-analyses reported insufficient systematic reviews and only pooled outcomes, which cannot determine the diagnostic validity of sPGA with a cut-off value of PG I ≤70 ng/mL and/or PG I/PG II ratio ≤3. We searched the core databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase) from their inception to April 2018. Fourteen and 43 studies were identified and analyzed for the diagnostic performance in CAG and gastric neoplasms, respectively. Values for sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the curve with a cut-off value of PG I ≤70 ng/mL and PG I/PG II ratio ≤3 to diagnose CAG were 0.59, 0.89, 12, and 0.81, respectively and for diagnosis of gastric cancer (GC) these values were 0.59, 0.73, 4, and 0.7, respectively. Methodological quality and ethnicity of enrolled studies were found to be the reason for the heterogeneity in CAG diagnosis. Considering the high specificity, non-invasiveness, and easily interpretable characteristics, sPGA has potential for screening of CAG or GC.

Indexed as

atrophicgastric neoplasmsgastritispepsinogens

Identifiers

PMID31083485
PMCPMC6572271

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.