ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2023
Comparison of Gastric Cancer Risk Classifications Using Conventional and New Pepsinogen Criteria.
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Associations Between Pepsinogen Levels and Various Health Indicators in a Healthy Guangzhou Population.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Value of serum pepsinogen ratio screening for early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions in Youcheng area.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Circulating Proteins as Diagnostic Markers in Gastric Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: New serum pepsinogen (PG) criteria have been shown to indicate more accurately infection with Methods: The study participants were 275 patients with gastric cancer and 275 apparently healthy controls from case-control study data. We cross-sectionally compared the results of gastric cancer risk classifications that were based on a combination of the new PG criteria (PG II ≥ 10 ng/mL or PG I/II ≤ 5) and an Results: Applying the conventional criteria resulted in 89 controls being classified as low risk. Applying the new criteria resulted in 23 controls (bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 14, 32) being additionally classified as high risk. Eight patients with gastric cancer were classified as low risk using the conventional criteria; however, six of these patients were classified as high risk by the new criteria (bootstrapped 95% CI: 2, 11). Conclusions: Compared with the conventional criteria, the new PG criteria with
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.