ArticleDEN open2023
Glasgow-Blatchford score combined with nasogastric aspirate as a new diagnostic algorithm for patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Article in DEN open, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of nasogastric tube decompression in mitigating delayed bleeding following endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancers.Surgical endoscopy · 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
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) is a widely used risk assessment tool for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. However, it only identifies a relatively low proportion of patients at low risk for adverse events and poor outcomes. We developed a simple diagnostic algorithm combining the GBS and nasogastric aspirate and evaluated its diagnostic performance. Methods: A total of 115 consecutive patients with suspected nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding who underwent nasogastric tube placement and upper endoscopy at our emergency department were prospectively evaluated. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the GBS and our algorithm for predicting high-risk endoscopic lesions (HRELs) using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: Thirty-five patients had HRELs. Compared with the GBS, our algorithm showed superior performance with respect to the prediction of HRELs (area under the curve, 0.639 and 0.854, respectively; Conclusions: The novel algorithm has improved the diagnostic performance of the GBS and predicted more patients who did not have HRELs than the GBS alone. After further validation, it may be a useful tool for making clinical management decisions for patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
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.