ArticleInternational journal of surgery protocols2024
Endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in International journal of surgery protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous studies have reached mixed conclusions regarding the timing of endoscopic approaches for managing individuals with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB). Therefore, the authors performed a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of various timing endoscopic approaches in managing individuals with AUGIB. Methods: The authors will search multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Database, Wanfang Database, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Chinese Clinical Trial Register. The search will cover the entire duration, starting from the establishment of these databases until July 2023. The selection criteria will focus on randomized controlled trials that assess the efficacy of endoscopy with varying timing in managing patients with AUGIB. The primary outcomes will include primary hemostasis and inpatient death. The secondary outcomes will include recurrent bleeding, need for surgical intervention, admission to the ICU, blood transfusion needs, and duration of hospitalization. Two reviewers will select the studies, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. A Bayesian approach will be used to conduct a network meta-analysis. Results: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Conclusion: This network meta-analysis provides comprehensive evidence of different timing endoscopic approaches for managing individuals with AUGIB.
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.