ReviewBest practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology2025
Screening for and surveillance of premalignant conditions of the stomach.
Review in Best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gastric Mucosa Cancer Risk: The Operative Link on Gastritis Assessment Staging System.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2026Review
- Metabolic remodeling by circular RNAs in gastric tumorigenesis: From mechanisms to biomarker discovery (Review).International journal of oncology · 2026Review
- Identification of a novel ion channel-related gene signature to predict prognosis and immune response of gastric cancer.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Impact of incisura biopsy on the surveillance of precursor lesions and gastric cancer risk assessment.Gastroenterology report · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Strategies for population-based screening are thus far only implemented in high incidence countries such as South Korea or Japan with data showing a positive impact on gastric cancer mortality. Screening in most Western countries is deemed not cost-effective as these are mainly classified as low or intermediate risk regions. This is in part due to high costs for endoscopy as the diagnostic gold-standard. Blood testing for serum pepsinogens is implemented as a pre-screening tool in some Asian countries but can better highlight mucosal atrophy than the cancer itself. Endoscopic surveillance of patients with advanced preneoplastic conditions allows detection of early neoplastic lesions that can be treated endoscopically, resulting in better outcome, and is hence now also recommended by several European countries. However, there is no uniform approach, so screening and surveillance strategies need to take regional characteristics into account including gastric cancer incidence and cost for endoscopy among others.
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.