ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2024
Development and validation of a prediction model for early screening of people at high risk for colorectal cancer.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2024. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Glycoproteomics of Gastrointestinal Cancers and Its Use in Clinical Diagnostics.Journal of proteome research · 2025Review
- Development and validation of an information-motivation-behavioral skills questionnaire for colorectal cancer prevention in a high-risk population.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- A Score to Predict Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Adults Younger than Age 45.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Medical treatment cost for Chinese inpatients with colorectal cancer by sites.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
- Trends and hotspots in gastrointestinal neoplasms risk assessment: A bibliometric analysis from 1984 to 2022.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is a serious threat worldwide. Although early screening is suggested to be the most effective method to prevent and control CRC, the current situation of early screening for CRC is still not optimistic. In China, the incidence of CRC in the Yangtze River Delta region is increasing dramatically, but few studies have been conducted. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a simple and efficient early screening model for CRC.
aimTo develop and validate an early-screening nomogram model to identify individuals at high risk of CRC.
methodsData of 64448 participants obtained from Ningbo Hospital, China between 2014 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The cohort comprised 64448 individuals, of which, 530 were excluded due to missing or incorrect data. Of 63918, 7607 (11.9%) individuals were considered to be high risk for CRC, and 56311 (88.1%) were not. The participants were randomly allocated to a training set (44743) or validation set (19175). The discriminatory ability, predictive accuracy, and clinical utility of the model were evaluated by constructing and analyzing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and calibration curves and by decision curve analysis. Finally, the model was validated internally using a bootstrap resampling technique.
resultsSeven variables, including demographic, lifestyle, and family history information, were examined. Multifactorial logistic regression analysis revealed that age [odds ratio (OR): 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-1.03,
conclusionThe early-screening nomogram model for CRC prediction in high-risk populations developed in this study based on age, BMI, WC, lifestyle, and family history exhibited high accuracy.
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.