ArticleCureus2023
The Predictive Value of Glasgow-Blatchford Score: The Experience of an Emergency Department.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Readmission Events Following EGD for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleed: An Analysis Using the National Readmission Database.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Management of gastrointestinal bleed in the intensive care setting, an updated literature review.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Hemoglobin, Albumin, Lymphocyte and Platelet Score as a Novel Predictor of Mortality and Rebleeding in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Analysis of factors associated with 1-year rebleeding in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and a Glasgow- Blatchford Score ≥ 6 based on serological indicators.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing the Predictive Factors for Bleeding in Esophageal Variceal Disease: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUpper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) is a common emergency and a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. An early and accurate assessment at admission is essential to estimate the severity of each case, assisting in the management of patients. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) is currently recommended for risk stratification of UGB in the emergency department (ED), helping triage patients to in-hospital vs. ambulatory management. The aim of this study was to test the validity of the GBS in an ED.
methodsPatients who presented to the ED with a diagnosis of UGB between 2017 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed.
resultsThe mean GBS value of the 149 patients included in the study was 10.3. Of the patients, 4.3% had values ≤1 and 8.7% had values ≤3. The sensitivity and negative predictive value for intervention needs (98.9% and 91.7%) and complications in 30 days (100% and 100%) remained high with a threshold ≤3. In the receiver operating characteristic curves, GBS presented an area under the curve of 0.883 and 0.625, regarding the need for intervention and complications in 30 days, respectively.
conclusionsIn our population, the threshold ≤2, and eventually ≤3, allows the identification of twice as many low-risk patients, manageable as outpatients, without significant increases in intervention needs or complications in 30 days.
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.