ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2021
Clinically significant endoscopic findings in patients of dyspepsia with no warning symptoms: A cross-sectional study.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Second Asian Consensus Report on Functional Dyspepsia (2025): Updated Recommendations.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Pooled it
- A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive tests forFrontiers in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Prevalence and factors associated with organic dyspepsia in older adults with dyspepsia.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Spectrum of Upper Gastrointestinal Diseases in Patients Presenting with Dyspepsia-A First Report from Myanmar.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- The burden of irritable bowel syndrome and functional dyspepsia in Poland: a cross-sectional study from West Pomeranian Voivodship.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDyspepsia is one of the commonest clinical disorder. However, controversy remains over the role of endoscopy in patients with dyspepsia. No studies have evaluated the diagnostic value of endoscopy in patients with no warning symptoms according to the Rome IV criteria.
aimTo study the diagnostic value of endoscopy in dyspeptic patients with no warning symptoms.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included dyspeptic patients with no warning symptoms who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria at The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University from April 2018 to February 2019. The clinical data were collected using questionnaires, including dyspeptic information, warning symptoms, other diseases, family history and basic demographic data. Based on dyspeptic symptoms, patients can be divided into epigastric pain syndrome, postprandial distress syndrome or overlapping subtypes.
resultsA total of 1016 cases were enrolled, 304 (29.9%) had clinically significant findings that were detectable by endoscopy. The endoscopy findings included esophageal lesions in 180 (17.7%) cases, peptic ulcers in 115 (11.3%) cases and malignancy in 9 (0.89%) patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that males [odds ratio (OR) = 1.758,
conclusionChinese patients with dyspepsia with no warning symptoms should undergo endoscopy, particularly males, patients with body mass index > 25, epigastric pain or
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.