Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33850466›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of medical sciences2021

Development and validation a simple model for identify malignant ascites.

Ying-Yun Guo, Xiu-Lan Peng, Na Zhan, Shan Tian, Jiao Li, Wei-Guo Dong

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in International journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Tumor vessel normalization and immunotherapy in gastric cancer.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2022
    Review
  6. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ying-Yun GuoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430060, China.
Xiu-Lan PengDepartment of Oncology, The Fifth Hospital of Wuhan, Wuhan, Hubei, 430050, China.
Na ZhanDepartment of Pathology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430060, China.
Shan TianDepartment of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430060, China.
Jiao LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430060, China.
Wei-Guo DongDepartment of Gastroenterology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430060, China.
Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The differential diagnosis of benign ascites and malignant ascites is incredibly challenging for clinicians. This research aimed to develop a user-friendly predictive model to discriminate malignant ascites from non-malignant ascites through easy-to-obtain clinical parameters. All patients with new-onset ascites fluid were recruited from January 2014 to December 2018. The medical records of 317 patients with ascites for various reasons in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University were collected and reviewed retrospectively. Thirty-six parameters were included and selected using univariate logistic regression, multivariate logistic regression, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses to establish a mathematical model for differential diagnosis, and its diagnostic performance was validated in the other groups. Age, cholesterol, hypersensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in serum, ascitic fluid adenosine deaminase (AF ADA), ascitic fluid lactate dehydrogenase (AF LDH) involvement in a 5-marker model. With a cut-off level of 0.83, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the ROC of the model for identifying malignant ascites in the development dataset were 84.7%, 88.8%, 87.6%, and 0.874 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.822-0.926), respectively, and 80.9%, 82.6%, 81.5%, and 0.863 (95% CI,0.817-0.913) in the validation dataset, respectively. The diagnostic model has a similar high diagnostic performance in both the development and validation datasets. The mathematical diagnostic model based on the five markers is a user-friendly method to differentiate malignant ascites from benign ascites with high efficiency.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalAdenosine DeaminaseAdultAgedAscitesAscitic FluidCholesterolC-Reactive ProteinDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansL-Lactate DehydrogenaseMaleMiddle AgedParacentesisPeritoneal NeoplasmsAdenosine DeaminaseCholesterolC-Reactive ProteinL-Lactate Dehydrogenaseascitescarcinomadiagnosisdifferentiallogistic models

Identifiers

PMID33850466
PMCPMC8040393
OpenAlexW3139053145

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.