ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2022
Early Identification of High-Risk Factors for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution of mortality rates due to gastrointestinal bleeding in Peru and its geographic areas, 2003-2022.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- Construction and validation of a predictive model for the risk of rebleeding in patients with esophageal and gastric varices hemorrhage.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify simple and accurate pre-endoscopy risk factors for early identification of high-risk upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Methods: Patients who were admitted to Suzhou Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019, due to upper gastrointestinal bleeding were retrieved, and the detailed clinical data of the above patients were collected. Patients with a definite diagnosis of bleeding from esophageal/and gastric varices were assigned to the high-risk group. Patients with bleeding not caused by varices were divided into a high-risk and a low-risk group according to the Forrest grading and scoring standard (high-risk group Forrest Ia-IIb, low-risk group Forrest IIc-III). Univariate analysis, Results: A total of 916 patients were collected. Three risk factors among the screened risk factors (1) hemoglobin ≤ 85 g/L, (2) vomiting red blood, and (3) "red bloody stool" were analyzed by ROC curve analysis. The specificities of each factor were 78.4%, 94.5%, and 96.7%, respectively, and the sensitivities were 71.8%, 55.9%, and 23.1%, respectively. We also derived a risk prediction scoring system for the three factors that meet the high risk such as (1) hemoglobin ≤ 83 g/L, (2)vomiting red blood, and (3) "red bloody stool." The area under the ROC curve (AUROC), sensitivity, and specificity were 0.877, 0.904, and 0.746. Conclusion: Hemoglobin ≤ 85 g/L, vomiting red blood, and red bloody stool were included in a simple scoring standard for predicting high-risk UGIB patients before endoscopy. The new risk prediction scoring system requires only three indicators and has the advantages of high accuracy, short time-consuming, and easy application.
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.