ArticleCureus2025
Evaluating the Performance of Four Risk Assessment Scores in Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Organizational models for acute gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review of hospital networks, multidisciplinary care and bloodless programs (2015-2025).Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The Relationship Between Blood Urea Nitrogen to Albumin Ratio (BAR) and Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU) in Diabetic Patients.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) continues to remain a life-threatening medical emergency, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Several scoring systems have been developed to predict outcomes, but the best risk stratification tool for emergency situations remains uncertain. This study examines four existing scoring systems: the blood urea nitrogen-to-serum albumin ratio (BAR), the international normalized ratio-to-albumin ratio (PTAR), the lactate-to-albumin ratio (LTA), and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS).
methodsThis retrospective, hospital-based study was conducted at the Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare (JHAH) facility in eastern Saudi Arabia from January 2020 to September 2023. Eligible participants were non-trauma UGIB patients aged 18 years or older. Cancer patients were excluded. Patient characteristics, vital signs, test results, comorbidities, disposition, and survival status at discharge were among the information collected from medical records. The four score systems were calculated and compared based on their predictive performance.
resultNEWS demonstrated the highest overall predictive performance, particularly for hospital admission (AUC 84%) and 90-day mortality (AUC 77.2%). Both NEWS and BAR were equally effective in predicting blood transfusion (AUC 71.7%). LTA showed the highest sensitivity for mortality prediction (75%), while PTAR provided moderate predictive value across all outcomes.
conclusionAmong the four scoring systems evaluated, NEWS consistently outperformed others in predicting key clinical outcomes in NVUGIB, making it a reliable tool for initial risk stratification. BAR is also valuable for assessing transfusion needs, while LTA and PTAR may serve complementary roles depending on the clinical context.
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.