ArticleScientific reports2023
Construction and validation of risk prediction model for gastrointestinal bleeding in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass on gastrointestinal complications in cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Models With Prognostic Implications for Predicting Gastrointestinal Bleeding After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Guiding Personalized Medicine: Multicenter Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- A LASSO-derived model for the prediction of coagulation disorders after coronary artery bypass grafting.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Predicting the risk of postoperative gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with Type A aortic dissection based on an interpretable machine learning model.Frontiers in medicine · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop a risk prediction model for gastrointestinal bleeding in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and assessed its accuracy. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 232 patients who underwent CABG under general anesthesia in our hospital between January 2022 and December 2022. The patients were divided into gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) group (n = 52) and group without gastrointestinal bleeding (non-GIB) (n = 180). The independent risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding in post-CABG patients were analyzed using χ
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.