ArticleBMC gastroenterology2022
Prediction of the need for emergency endoscopic treatment for upper gastrointestinal bleeding and new score model: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06254352 (Evaluation of Clinical Risk Scores in Prediction of Outcome of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Non Cirrhotic Patients), which is not on this 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.
Evaluation of Clinical Risk Scores in Prediction of Outcome of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Non Cirrhotic Patients
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A Clustering-Based Machine Learning Approach for Mortality Prediction in Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Development and Validation.Gastro hep advances · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a machine learning model to predict hemostatic intervention in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Risk stratification and scoring systems in upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: review of performance and limitations in the emergency department.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Pre-Endoscopic Scores Predicting Low-Risk Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- The Accuracy of Pre-Endoscopic Scores for Mortality Prediction in Patients with Upper GI Bleeding and No Endoscopy Performed.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Retrospective analysis of risk factors for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and construction of a nomogram prediction model.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastrointestinal bleeding is one of the major gastrointestinal diseases. In this study, our objective was to compare Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), AIMS65 score, MAP score, Modified GBS, and Iino score as outcome measures for upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In addition, we extracted factors associated with hemostatic procedures including endoscopy, and proposed a new robust score model.
methodsFrom January 2015 to December 2019, 675 patients with symptoms such as hematemesis who visited the National Hospital Organization Disaster Medical Center and underwent urgent upper endoscopy with diagnosis of suspected non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding were retrospectively reviewed. We evaluated the GBS, AIMS65 score, MAP score, Modified GBS, and Iino score, and assessed the outcomes of patients requiring hemostatic treatments at the subsequent emergency endoscopy. We performed logistic regression analysis of factors related to endoscopic hemostasis and upper gastrointestinal bleeding, created a new score model, and evaluated the prediction of hemostatic treatment and mortality in the new score and the existing scores.
resultsThe factors associated with endoscopic treatment were hematemesis, heart rate, HB (hemoglobin), blood pressure, blood urea nitrogen (BUN). Based on these predictors and the partial regression coefficients, a new score named H3B2 (using the initial letters of hematemesis, heart rate, HB, blood pressure, and BUN) was generated. H3B2 score was slightly more discriminatory compared to GBS and Modified GBS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC): 0.73 versus 0.721 and 0.7128, respectively) in predicting hemostatic treatment in emergency endoscopy. The H3B2 score also showed satisfactory prediction accuracy for subsequent deaths (AUROC: 0.6857. P < 0.001).
conclusionsWe proposed a new score, the H3B2 score, consisting of simple and objective indices in cases of suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The H3B2 score is useful in identifying high-risk patients with suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding who require urgent hemostatic treatment including emergency endoscopy.
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.