ArticleCancer management and research2021
Gastric Cancer Screening Methods: A Comparative Study of Two Scoring Methods.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Divergent roles of endoscopic Kyoto classification and serological Li's scoring in immediate and long-term gastric cancer risk stratification: a 4-year longitudinal study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Elucidating epigenetic landscape of gastric premalignant lesions through genome-wide mapping of 5-hydroxymethylcytosines: A 12-year median follow-up study.Clinical and translational medicine · 2024Article
- Gastric Cancer Screening Methods: A Comparative Study of the Chinese New Gastric Cancer Screening Score and Kyoto Classification of Gastritis.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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the Li's and Japanese scoring methods scoring for screening early gastric cancer in a healthy population.
methodsDuring January 2016-December 2018, profiles of the healthy people participated in a physical examination in the first people's Hospital of Shanghai were collected. A total of 342 volunteers, including 137 males and 205 females ageing 40-74, were enrolled. After recording the basic information, all volunteers were scored using the Japan scoring method and the new gastric cancer screening score (ie, Li's score). The subjects' work characteristics (ROC curve) were drawn according to the patient's endoscopic pathological examination to indicate early gastric cancer, to determine the best cut-off point for the diagnosis of early gastric cancer by Japanese scoring and Li's scoring, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of both scoring methods were calculated as well.
resultsThe area under the ROC curve of Japanese and Li's score, in the diagnosis of early gastric cancer, was 0.763 and 0.837, respectively. Japanese and Li's score ≥14 were considered as the best cut-off point. The sensitivity and specificity of Li's scoring were 63.60% and 91.10%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the Japanese score were 54.50% and 87.50%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve in Li's scoring is more significant than that in Japanese scoring, and there was a substantial difference in the two methods (P<0.05).
conclusionBoth Li's scoring and Japanese scoring have shown good screening value for early gastric cancer in a healthy population, but Li's scoring is more sensitive/specific than Japanese scoring.
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.