ArticleJPGN reports2021
Quality Improvement Initiative to Improve Endoscopic Reassessment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis.
Article in JPGN reports, 2021. 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.
- Marked Improvement in Food Impaction Biopsy Rate (FIBR) After Implementation of a Multicenter Behavioral Intervention.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2026Article
- Eosinophils, Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Diseases, and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Critical Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) endoscopic reference score (EREFS) is a validated system for description, recognition, and reporting of EoE findings during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). This scoring system correlates with esophageal eosinophilia and therapeutic responses and has validated diagnostic accuracy with good inter- and intraobserver reliability in pediatric and adult patients. In this study, we aimed to improve physician education on and documentation of EREFS and correlate EREFS scoring with eosinophil density on histology. Methods: Applying the "Plan, Do, Study, Act" methodology for quality improvement between October 2018 and November 2019, we established a baseline rate of EREFS completion by review of the electronic medical record (EMR). Key drivers were identified, and 3 interventions were implemented. Results: Over 12 months, 542 distinct endoscopies were performed on 410 patients for EoE surveillance. Patients were 68% male with a mean age of 10.9 years (SD 5.7 years), mean EREFS score of 2.14 (SD 1.88), and mean peak eosinophil count 30.9 eos/hpf (SD 37.1 eos/hpf). Baseline EREFS completion rate of 72.7% (90% CI, 67.4-77.4). Following all 3 PDSA cycles, EREFS completion rate significantly improved to greater than desired target of 90% (94.9%; 90% CI, 90.6-97.6; Conclusion: Interventions including provider education and the inclusion of EREFS in documentation templates can increase adoption rates of EREFS among providers caring for patients with known EoE.
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.