ReviewAmerican journal of translational research2024
Efficacy of magnifying endoscopy combined with narrowband imaging in detection of early gastric cancer: a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis.
Review in American journal of translational research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology task force recommendations on surveillance forGut · 2026Guideline
- Role of image-enhanced endoscopy for the diagnosis of gastric intestinal metaplasia.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Hypoxia-inducible factors: Regulatory functions and status as a therapeutic target in gastric cancer (Review).Oncology letters · 2026Review
- A multicenter retrospective study: risk factors and nomogram construction for pathological escalation of gastric low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Virtual NBI image synthesis using stable diffusion for enhanced recognition of early gastric cancer: a technical validation study.Annals of 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnifying endoscopy combined with narrowband imaging (ME-NBI) in detecting early gastric cancer (EGC) and to provide a scientific basis for its clinical utility.
methodsLiterature published before May 2024 that utilized ME-NBI for diagnosing EGC was searched across PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and major Chinese databases. Included studies were cohort studies or randomized controlled trials, and their quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 framework. Meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 17 software to calculate diagnostic indicators such as sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC). Heterogeneity was explored through Spearman's correlation coefficient, I
resultsTwenty studies involving 7,770 patients and 7,917 lesions were included. The pooled sensitivity of ME-NBI for diagnosing EGC was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.80-0.90), specificity was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86-0.96), and the AUC was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96), demonstrating high diagnostic accuracy. Subgroup analysis revealed lower sensitivity in multicenter studies. Excised samples had similar sensitivity to biopsy samples but differed in specificity. Publication bias was detected (P=0.01), but sensitivity analysis corrected for this, maintaining high combined sensitivity, specificity, and AUC.
conclusionME-NBI is a highly accurate and reliable diagnostic tool for EGC. Despite have some bias and heterogeneity, this was effectively addressed through sensitivity and subgroup analyses. ME-NBI should be considered a preferred method for EGC screening and diagnosis in clinical practice.
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.