ArticleBMC gastroenterology2020
Validation of a new risk score system for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Pathway for Enhanced Recovery in the Management of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2023Trial
- Article
- Are Scoring Systems Useful in Predicting Mortality from Upper GI Bleeding in Geriatric Patients?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison of the new risk score (ABL) with the Glasgow Blatchford Score, AIMS65, and pre-endoscopic Rockall Score in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding admitted to the emergency department.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Impact of Timing of Endoscopy on Mortality in Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Cohort Study :.Galen medical journal · 2025Article
- Predictive utility of the Rockall scoring system in patients suffering from acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Importance of risk assessment, endoscopic hemostasis, and recent advancements in the management of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- A Review of Risk Scores within Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- The Accuracy of Pre-Endoscopic Scores for Mortality Prediction in Patients with Upper GI Bleeding and No Endoscopy Performed.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Retrospective analysis of risk factors for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and construction of a nomogram prediction model.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
- Comparison of intermittent and continuous proton pump inhibitor infusions in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: A retrospective study.Saudi medical journal · 2022Article
- Comparisons of six endoscopy independent scoring systems for the prediction of clinical outcomes for elderly and younger patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Acute Upper Non-variceal and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022Review
- Endovascular Treatment of Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Six Preendoscopy Scoring Systems to Predict Outcomes for Older Adults with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently, a new international bleeding score was developed to predict 30-day hospital mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, the efficacy of this newly developed scoring system has not been extensively investigated. We aimed to validate a new scoring system for predicting 30-day mortality in patients with non-variceal UGIB and determine whether a higher score is associated with re-bleeding, length of hospital stay, and endoscopic failure.
methodsA retrospective study was performed on 905 patients with acute non-variceal UGIB who were examined in our hospital between January 2013 and December 2017. Baseline characteristics, endoscopic findings, re-bleeding, admission, and mortality were reviewed. The 30-day mortality rate of the new international bleeding risk score was calculated using the receiver operating characteristic curves and compared to the pre-endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, Glasgow Blatchford score, and Progetto Nazionale Emorragia Digestiva score. To verify the variable for the 30-day mortality of the new scoring system, we performed multivariate logistic regression using our data and further analyzed the score items.
resultsThe new international bleeding scoring system showed higher receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve values in predicting mortality (area under ROC curve 0.958; [95% confidence interval (CI)]), compared with such as AIMS65 (AUROC, 0.832; 95%CI, 0.806-0.856; P < 0.001), PNED (AUROC, 0.865; 95%CI, 0.841-0.886; P < 0.001), Pre-RS (AUROC, 0.802; 95%CI, 0.774-0.827; P < 0.001), and GBS (AUROC, 0.765; 95%CI, 0.736-0.793; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis was performed using our data and showed that the 30-day mortality rate was related to multiple comorbidities, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, albumin, syncope at first visit, and endoscopic failure within 24 h during the first admission. In addition, in the high-score group, relatively long hospital stay, re-bleeding, and endoscopic failure were observed.
conclusionThis is a preliminary report of a new bleeding score which may predict 30-day mortality better than the other scoring systems. High-risk patients could be screened using this new scoring system to predict 30-day mortality. The use of this scoring system seemed to improve the outcomes of non-variceal UGIB patients in this study, through proper management and intervention.
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.