ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2019
Use of the Electronic Health Record to Target Patients for Non-endoscopic Barrett's Esophagus Screening.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review with meta-analysis: the effects of family history on the risk of Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2021Pooled it
- Risk Prediction Model for Esophageal Cancer Among General Population: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in public health · 2021Pooled it
- New Approaches to Screening for Barrett Esophagus.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025Article
- Twenty-Five Years of Evolution and Hurdles in Electronic Health Records and Interoperability in Medical Research: Comprehensive Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Review
- Cost-effective identification of Barrett's esophagus in the community: A first step towards screening.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
- Longitudinal Study of Comorbidities and Clinical Outcomes in Persons with Gallstone Disease Using Electronic Health Records.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Article
- Missed Opportunities: the Timing and Frequency of Screening Colonoscopy in Patients That Develop Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Article
- Patient Factors Associated With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Diagnostic Evaluation Strategies: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using Real-World Evidence From a Large U.S. Medical Claims Database.Gastro hep advances · 2022Article
- Risk Prediction of Barrett's Esophagus in a Taiwanese Health Examination Center Based on Regression Models.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Screening for Barrett's Oesophagus: Are We Ready for it?Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Risk Prediction Models for Barrett's Esophagus Discriminate Well and Are Generalizable in an External Validation Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical prediction models targeting patients for Barrett's esophagus (BE) screening include data obtained by interview, questionnaire, and body measurements. A tool based on electronic health records (EHR) data could reduce cost and enhance usability, particularly if combined with non-endoscopic BE screening methods.
aimsTo determine whether EHR-based data can identify BE patients.
methodsWe performed a retrospective review of patients ages 50-75 who underwent a first-time esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Data extracted from the EHR included demographics and BE risk factors. Endoscopy and pathology reports were reviewed for histologically confirmed BE. Screening criteria modified from clinical guidelines were assessed for association with BE. Subsequently, a score based on multivariate logistic regression was developed and assessed for its ability to identify BE subjects.
resultsA total of 2931 patients were assessed, and BE was found in 1.9%. Subjects who met screening criteria were more likely to have BE (3.3% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.001), and the criteria predicted BE with an AUROC of 0.65 (95% CI 0.59-0.71). A score based on logistic regression modeling included gastroesophageal reflux disease, sex, body mass index, and ever-smoker status and identified BE subjects with an AUROC of 0.71 (95% CI 0.64-0.77). Both prediction tools produced higher AUROCs in women than in men.
conclusionsEHR-based BE risk prediction tools identify BE patients with fair accuracy. While these tools may improve the efficiency of patient targeting for BE screening in the primary care setting, challenges remain to identify high-risk patients for non-invasive BE screening in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.