ReviewGastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench2025
Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: evolving classification tools.
Review in Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is a fundamental tool for diagnosing and managing digestive diseases. Standardized classification systems have enhanced the consistency, accuracy, and clinical decision-making in endoscopic evaluation. This review explores key classification systems, their applications, and challenges in their implementation (1). A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Medline, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Relevant classification systems for upper GI endoscopy were categorized based on anatomical regions and adverse event reporting. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted tools were used to refine descriptions of classification criteria, and a structured figure was developed to visually represent these classifications. Major classification systems reviewed include the Los Angeles Classification (2) for reflux esophagitis, Prague Classification (3) for Barrett's esophagus, and the Forrest Classification (4) for peptic ulcer disease. The AGREE Classification (5) was highlighted for its role in adverse event reporting. Advances in high-definition imaging and narrow-band imaging (NBI) (6) have refined these classifications, improving diagnostic precision. However, practical challenges remain, including the complexity of these systems and the need for continuous education among endoscopists (7). Endoscopic classification systems play a crucial role in standardizing the assessment of GI diseases, improving diagnostic accuracy, treatment decisions, and communication among clinicians. As these classifications evolve, their continued refinement and integration into clinical practice will enhance their utility, ensuring consistency in endoscopic evaluations and better patient outcomes.
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.