ArticleBMC gastroenterology2022
Evaluation of screening tests for autoimmune gastritis in histopathologically confirmed Japanese patients, and re-evaluation of histopathological classification.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pepsinogen Assay Findings in Individuals With Gastric Atrophy and Intestinal Metaplasia.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2026Review
- A machine-learning model for staging autoimmune gastritis based on endoscopic and serological features.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic spectrum of autoimmune gastritis across disease stages: a focus on Barrett's esophagus and ME-NBI features.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Autoimmune Gastritis: Unveiling the Mystery.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Review
- What Is the Easiest Way to Diagnose Advanced-Stage Autoimmune Gastritis in the Korean Context?Gut and liver · 2025Article
- Update in Molecular Aspects and Diagnosis of Autoimmune Gastritis.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023Review
- [Type A, Type B, and Non-atrophic Gastritis].The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aims of the present study are to evaluate non-invasive screening tests for autoimmune gastritis (AIG) and re-evaluate histopathological classification.
methodsWe screened candidates of AIG in JCHO Shiga Hospital between May 2012 and January 2020. The screening criteria were as follows: endoscopic O-p atrophy with Updated Kimura-Takemoto classification, 3 + pepsinogen (PG) test, low serum vitamin B
resultsTwenty-two of 28 (78.6%) patients who met the screening criteria were histopathologically confirmed as AIG. Common clinical findings in the AIG patients were 10 × or greater anti-PC antibody, elevated serum gastrin greater than 172 pg/mL and endoscopic atrophy O-1 or greater. The areas under the curve of PG I, PG II and PG I/II ratio were 0.81, 0.29 and 0.98, respectively. Among histopathologically confirmed AIG patients, 4 and 18 patients were histopathologically classified into florid and end stages, respectively, while no patients into early stage. We could not find a significant difference between florid and end stages in the screening items studied.
conclusionsFlorid and end stages in histopathological classification are both advanced-stage AIG in clinical aspects. Our screening criteria without biopsy are applicable to screen clinically-advanced AIG with 78.6% positive predictive value. PG I and PG I/II ratio may be useful to screen AIG. However, we may need other criteria to screen early stage of AIG.
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.