ArticleMedical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina)2020
Comparison of Glasgow-Blatchford Score and Rockall Score in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Article in Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Right patient, right time, right endoscopic procedure? A single centre retrospective review of inpatient endoscopy.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Racial Disparities in Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Treatment.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
- Pyroptosis-immunity-microbiome axis in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: mechanisms, risk prediction, and individualized strategies.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Stress hyperglycemia ratio predicts adverse outcomes in emergency department patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.PloS one · 2026Article
- Evaluation of pre-endoscopy risk scores and base deficit for prediction adverse clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical Impact of Red Blood Cell Transfusion Location on Gastrointestinal Bleeding Outcomes: Emergency Department vs. Inpatient Unit.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Endoscopic evaluation of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in high-risk populations for hepatitis B and C: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Endoscopic intervention in hematologic malignancy patients with severe thrombocytopenia: Methodological concerns, clinical implications, and future research directions.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Risk stratification and scoring systems in upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: review of performance and limitations in the emergency department.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Analysis of factors associated with 1-year rebleeding in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and a Glasgow- Blatchford Score ≥ 6 based on serological indicators.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating The Glasgow Blatchford Score for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk Stratification in A Community Hospital: A Retrospective Study.Spartan medical research journal · 2025Article
- Construction and validation of a predictive model for the risk of rebleeding in patients with esophageal and gastric varices hemorrhage.BMC gastroenterology · 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
- Efficacy of Vonoprazan vs. Intravenous Proton Pump Inhibitor in Prevention of Re-Bleeding of High-Risk Peptic Ulcers: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- A Nomogram Model for Prediction of Mortality Risk of Patients with Dangerous Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Two-center Retrospective Study.Current medical science · 2023Article
- Age, blood tests and comorbidities and AIMS65 risk scores outperform Glasgow-Blatchford and pre-endoscopic Rockall score in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
- The Accuracy of Pre-Endoscopic Scores for Mortality Prediction in Patients with Upper GI Bleeding and No Endoscopy Performed.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Nomogram Model for Predicting Type-2 Myocardial Infarction Induced by Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Current medical science · 2022Article
- International Normalized Ratio-to-Albumin Ratio as a Novel Marker of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Severity.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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUpper gastrointestinal bleeding can be a life-threatening condition and requires careful evaluation from the very first episode in order to reduce the risk of rebleeding, hemorrhagic shock and death. The outcome of a patient with upper gastrointestinal bleeding depends on resuscitation measures taken during admission to the hospital and an adequate assessment of the patient's risk level.
aimThe aim of the study is to compare Glasgow Blatchford score and Rockall score and to identify the most accurate score used in predicting unfavorable outcomes and the need for intervention.
methodsThis study involves 237 patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The accuracy of the scoring systems was assessed by plotting receiver-operating characteristic curves (ROC curves) and was calculated for GBS and RS with 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsAs for mortality prediction, RS was superior to GBS (AUC 0.806 vs. 0.750). The GBS had a higher accuracy in detecting patients who needed transfusion units and was superior to the RS (AUC 0.810 vs.0.675). In predicting the need for intervention, RS was superior to GBS (AUC 0.707 vs. 0.636.
conclusionGBS and RS are developed to help clinicians to triage patients appropriately in order to assess endoscopic therapy within a suitable time frame, as well as identify low risk patients for possible outpatient management. High accuracy of the GBS in predicting a need for transfusion represents an important endpoint to assess. RS was superior to GBS in predicting a need for intervention as well as mortality. Currently, a combination of these scoring systems is the best way for proper assessment.
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.