ArticleBMC cancer2025
Development and validation of a simple prediction risk score for predicting risk of gastric cancer in outpatient department.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly detection and screening of gastric cancer (GC) remain a critical clinical priority. This study aimed to develop and externally validate a simple, questionnaire-based prediction risk score (PRS) to identify individuals at elevated risk of GC prior to gastroscopy in outpatient settings.
methodsThis multicenter study developed the PRS using regression coefficients derived from 4800 participants in the Guangzhou cohort (training cohort) and conducted internal validation in the remaining 2058 participants (testing cohort). External validation was subsequently performed in an independent cohort of 1811 participants from Shenzhen cohort and in 424,897 participants from the China Kadoorie Biobank (CKB cohort). Participants were then stratified into average-risk and high-risk groups according to comparable levels of predicted risk.
resultsThe PRS included five predictors: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), family history of GC in first-degree relatives, and consumption of pickled food, with a total score ranging from 0 to 11. In the training cohort, the prevalence of GC was 1.4% in the average-risk group (0–4 points) and 8.3% in the high-risk group (5–11 points) (P < 0.001). Applying gastroscopy to high-risk participants allowed detection of 85.2% (178/209) of GC cases, including 36.5% (65/178) of early cases, while 55.1% of procedures could be avoided in the average-risk group. The PRS demonstrated good discrimination across the training, testing, Shenzhen cohort, and CKB cohorts (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]: 0.780, 0.789, 0.732, and 0.723, respectively) and showed satisfactory calibration (P > 0.05).
conclusionsThe PRS has good performance in predicting the risk of GC and reducing unnecessary gastroscopy screening, thus improves cost-effectiveness and saves medical resources.
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.