ArticleHealth science reports2021
Feasibility of endoscopic evaluation of
Article in Health science reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimal post-gastroscopy timing of the urea [Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Unveiling early stage autoimmune gastritis: novel endoscopic insights from two case reports.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Article
- Endoscopic evaluation by the Kyoto classification of gastritis combined with serum anti-Helicobacter pylori antibody testing reliably risk-stratifies subjects in a population-based gastric cancer screening program.Journal of gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Validation of a Novel Endoscopic Feature that PredictsThe Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2023Article
- Article
- Kyoto classification of gastritis: Advances and future perspectives in endoscopic diagnosis of gastritis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Gastric Cancer Screening in Japan: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Feasibility of endoscopic evaluation ofHealth science reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsWe have started a new population-based endoscopic gastric cancer screening program in Kurashiki city with consideration of
methodsData were collected from 1784 subjects without past eradication of
resultsThe endoscopic diagnoses were nongastritis, 1215 (68.1%); active or inactive gastritis, 469 (26.3%); and undefined, 23 (1.3%). With the ABC method as a reference standard, the false-negative rate of the endoscopic judgment for
conclusionsEndoscopic diagnosis of
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.