ArticleCancers2022
Modified BEST-J Score Model Predicts Bleeding after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection with Fewer Factors.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Prediction Models for Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Patients with Early Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Validation of the BEST-J score and identification of bile reflux as a risk factor for delayed bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Machine-Learning Prediction of Bleeding After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Study.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study constructed a simplified post-endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) prediction model with a prognostic nutritional index (PNI). A total of 449 patients who underwent gastric ESD was included, divided with a ratio of 2:1, and assigned to the model or validation cohort. A prediction model of post-ESD (modified BEST-J score) was constructed using the model cohort. The modified BEST-J score was evaluated by comparing its accuracy to the BEST-J score in the validation cohort. Within 4 weeks of ESD, melena, hematemesis, or a 2 g/dL or greater decrease in hemoglobin level that required esophagogastroduodenoscopy was defined as post-ESD bleeding. In the model cohort, 299 patients were enrolled and 25 (8.4%) had post-ESD bleeding. Independent risk factors for post-ESD bleeding were use of P2Y12RA, tumor size > 30 mm, location of lesion at lower one-third of the stomach, and PNI ≤ 47.9. Constructing the modified BEST-J score based on these variables, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio were 73.9%, 78.1%, and 3.37. When comparing the modified BEST-J score to the BEST-J score in the validation cohort, no significant difference was observed by ROC-AUC (0.77 vs. 0.75, p = 0.81). Modified BEST-J score can predict post-ESD bleeding more simply, with the same accuracy as the BEST-J score.
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.