ReviewHealth science reports2025
Use of Clinical Decision Support Systems for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Gastric Cancer: A Scoping Review.
Review in Health science reports, 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.
- Use of Clinical Decision Support Systems for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Gastric Cancer: A Scoping Review.Health science reports · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Gastric cancer (GC) has a high prevalence and death rates, threatening global public health. Utilizing clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) is advantageous for improving the quality of clinical decision-making and enhancing the efficiency of patient care delivery within healthcare environments. The present scoping review aims to identify gaps in existing knowledge and provide insights into the applications and characteristics of CDSSs, particularly in the development, evaluation, and interventions related to the GC disease. Methods: This scoping review was conducted in 2025, based on the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. WoS, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were searched until March 31, 2025, to retrieve relevant articles on the use of CDSS in GC. The data were extracted from the existing literature using a standardized data extraction form, and the results were presented in figure and table formats, as well as a narrative synthesis. Results: A total of 217 studies were identified through database searches. By considering the eligibility criteria, eight articles remained in the study. The CDSSs covered various topics, including assessing GC's risk, differential diagnosis, metastasis, and survival. Different software and programming languages were utilized to develop CDSSs. Various data inputs, such as pathological data, images, demographic information, and risk factors, were leveraged in CDSSs. The knowledge-based and nonknowledge-based systems utilized different computational approaches, including ontology, fuzzy logic, and machine learning. Additionally, various performance criteria were used to evaluate CDSSs on GC, and the CDSSs demonstrated acceptable to satisfactory performance through external validation. Conclusion: The use of CDSSs in GC would enhance clinical decision-making and improve patient care in healthcare settings. Future studies are recommended to utilize CDSSs with new technologies, such as a knowledge base with enhanced computational analytics and artificial intelligence for the diagnosis and prognosis of GC.
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.