SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2026
Risk Prediction Models for Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Patients with Early Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDelayed bleeding is a common complication after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer (EGC), but the quality and clinical applicability of existing risk prediction models remain uncertain. This meta-analysis was conducted to systematically evaluate and quantitatively synthesize published studies on risk prediction models for delayed bleeding after ESD in patients with EGC.
methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. All studies were searched in electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases) from inception to June 8, 2025. Two independent researchers screened the literature, extracted information, and assessed the risk of bias and applicability of the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 18.0 Software.
resultsOf 1245 studies, 12 studies were included in this review. The incidence of delayed bleeding after ESD in patients with EGC ranged from 4.7% to 18.33%. The most common predictors were lesion location and tumor size (maximum diameter of the lesion). The reported AUC values ranged from 0.53 to 0.99; the meta-analysis results showed that the pooled AUC for internal validation of 8 delayed bleeding risk prediction models was 0.74 (95%CI 0.67–0.80), while the AUC for external validation of 4 models was 0.70 (95%CI 0.61–0.79). The overall risk of bias was high.
conclusionsRisk prediction models for delayed bleeding after ESD in EGC patients demonstrated some degree of discriminatory power; however, all these studies were at high risk of bias in terms of quality. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD420251074300.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41896436What 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.