ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Efficacy and validation of a clinical predictive model for chronic atrophic gastritis in patients: a multi-center retrospective analysis.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) is a major digestive disorders, and prognosis is determined by many social-demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics. This study aimed to identify risk factors and construct a predictive model for better diagnosis of CAG. Methods: We utilized a multi-center retrospective analysis, including 539 cases of CAG patients diagnosed and treated in Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Chinese Medicine from September 2018 to December 2024 as training dataset, and 230 clinical data diagnosed with CAG from Hefei Second People's Hospital from April 2018 to November 2024 as validation dataset to establish the predictive model. Both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were employed to investigate the risk factors of CAG based on R software 4.4.1. After that, our predictive model was evaluated by nomogram, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for discrimination of the predictive model, calibration curves, Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test for uniformity between the predicted and actual probabilities and decision curve analysis (DCA) curves for clinical validity. Results: Our multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that depression disorder, drinking consumption, family history of digestive disorders, HP infection, pepsinogen I, pepsinogen II and gastrin 17 were the independent risk factors of our predictive model. A nomogram of CAG was established. The ROC curve revealed that our predictive model showed the best predictive efficacy with an AUC of 0.827 (95%CI = 0.784-0.870), with a specificity of 0.838 and sensitivity of 0.705 in training dataset, and an AUC of 0.970 (95%CI = 0.945-0.995), with a specificity of 0.881 and sensitivity of 0.950 in the validation dataset. Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test showed that our predictive model had a good fit for the training dataset (X-squared = 3.8293, df = 8, Conclusion: Our predictive model demonstrated that depression disorder, drinking consumption, family history of digestive disorders, HP infection, pepsinogen I, pepsinogen II and gastrin 17 were the independent risk factors of CAG with high accuracy and good calibration.
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.