ArticleCureus2024
Survey of Emergency Department Clinicians on the Utility of the Guaiac Fecal Occult Blood Test.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Emergency Physicians' and Hospitalists' Attitudes Toward Fecal Occult Blood Testing in Gastrointestinal Bleeding.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Fundamentals and research progression on electrochemical sensing of colorectal cancer.Mikrochimica acta · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEmergency department (ED) clinicians utilize the guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) in their assessment of suspected gastrointestinal bleeding or unexplained anemia despite supporting evidence. ED clinicians' ability to predict the gFOBT results and how the gFOBT results could affect ED patient disposition has not been previously studied. Methods: From October 16, 2019, through September 15, 2020, we conducted a single-site survey of ED clinicians before and after performing gFOBTs during routine clinical care. Survey data were collected and retrospectively evaluated with unadjusted and multivariable regression analyses.
resultsWe examined a total of 133 combined pre-gFOBT and post-gFOBT surveys. ED clinicians accurately predicted gFOBT results with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 (95%CI, 0.66-0.85). Of clinician-predicted certain or very probable positive gFOBT results, only 79% were actually positive. In multivariable analyses, decreased hematocrit level (odds ratio (OR), 0.31/10% increase; 95%CI, 0.14-0.61), decreased red blood cell count (OR, 0.41/1x10
conclusionsWe found that ED clinicians cannot predict the gFOBT results with high accuracy. A suspected GI bleed is the main reason for performing the test in the ED.
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.