Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36483157›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2022

Kyoto classification of gastritis: Advances and future perspectives in endoscopic diagnosis of gastritis.

Osamu Toyoshima, Toshihiro Nishizawa

Open access · greenAbstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. CurrentJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. World Endoscopy Organization Position Statements for Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopic Diagnosis of Gastric Epithelial Neoplasia.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026
    Review
  8. Integrative profiling ofMicrobial genomics · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Limited discriminative performance of endoscopic deep learning forFrontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Update on the pathogenesis and clinical management ofWorld journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology · 2025
    Review
  15. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  16. Diagnosis and treatment ofFuture microbiology · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Endoscopic Diagnosis of Early Gastric Cancer and High-Risk Gastritis.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Osamu ToyoshimaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Toyoshima Endoscopy Clinic, Tokyo 157-0066, Japan. t@ichou.com.
Toshihiro NishizawaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Toyoshima Endoscopy Clinic, Tokyo 157-0066, Japan.
Toho University · JPToshima Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This editorial provides an update of the recent evidence on the endoscopy-based Kyoto classification of gastritis, clarifying the shortcomings of the Kyoto classification, and providing prospects for future research, with particular focus on the histological subtypes of gastric cancer (GC) and

Indexed as

AtrophyHumansEndoscopyGastric cancerGastritisHelicobacter pyloriHistologyKyoto classification

Identifiers

PMID36483157
PMCPMC9724483
OpenAlexW4309311510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.