ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2024
A Composite Index for Distinguishing Benign and Malignant Obstructive Jaundice.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore a more effective and practical comprehensive index for differentiating benign from malignant obstructive jaundice by analyzing the clinical data of patients with benign obstructive jaundice (BJ) group and malignant obstructive jaundice (MJ) group. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 339 patients with obstructive jaundice. The cases were divided into two data sets: training cohort and validation cohort. The cases were divided into two groups: malignant and benign obstructive jaundice group. Logistic regression analysis was used to build a prediction model for judging the nature of obstructive jaundice, and the prediction model was verified using the validation cohort. Results: Multivariate analysis revealed that CEA, TBIL, and NLR were independent factors in malignant obstructive jaundice. A comprehensive index for differentiating benign from malignant obstructive jaundice was established based on these indicators. The sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic curve of this model for differentiating benign from malignant obstructive jaundice were 79.57%, 93.26%, and 0.920, respectively. Conclusion: The prediction model based on the comprehensive index of CEA, TBIL, and NLR has a higher accuracy in differentiating malignant obstructive jaundice.
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.