ArticleGut and liver2024
A New Risk Prediction Model for Detecting Endoscopic Activity of Ulcerative Colitis.
Article in Gut and liver, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an incurable, relapsing-remitting inflammatory disease that increases steadily. Mucosal healing has become the primary therapeutic objective for UC. Nevertheless, endoscopic assessments are invasive, expensive, time-consuming, and inconvenient. Therefore, it is crucial to develop a noninvasive predictive model to monitor endoscopic activity in patients with UC. Methods: Clinical data of 198 adult patients with UC were collected from January 2016 to August 2022 at Huadong Hospital, China. Results: Patients with UC were randomly divided into the training cohort (70%, n=138) and the validation cohort (30%, n=60). The receiver operating characteristic curve value for the training group was 0.858 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.781 to 0.936), whereas it was 0.845 (95% CI, 0.731 to 0.960) for the validation group. The calibration curve employed the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p>0.05) to demonstrate the consistency between the predicted and the actual probabilities in the nomogram of these two groups. The decision curve analysis validated that the nomogram had clinical usefulness. Conclusions: The nomogram, which incorporated activated partial thromboplastin time, fecal occult blood test, β2-globulin level, and fibrinogen degradation products, served as a prospective tool for evaluating UC activity in clinical practices.
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.