ReviewCureus2024
The Prediction and Treatment of Bleeding Esophageal Varices in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and Hemostatic Decision-Making: Current Evidence, Clinical Implications and Implementation Barriers.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparing the effect of pre-anesthesia clonidine and tranexamic acid on intraoperative bleeding volume in rhinoplasty: a machine learning approach.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Noninvasive prediction of esophagogastric varices in hepatitis B: An extreme gradient boosting model based on ultrasound and serology.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Esophageal varices (EVs), a significant complication of cirrhosis, present a considerable challenge in clinical practice due to their high risk of bleeding and associated morbidity and mortality. This manuscript explores the transformative role of artificial intelligence (AI) in the management of EV, particularly in enhancing diagnostic accuracy and predicting bleeding risks. It underscores the potential of AI in offering noninvasive, efficient alternatives to traditional diagnostic methods such as esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The complexity of EV management is highlighted, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach that includes pharmacological therapy, endoscopic interventions, and, in some cases, surgical options tailored to individual patient profiles. Additionally, the paper emphasizes the importance of integrating AI into medical education and practice, preparing healthcare professionals for the evolving landscape of medical technology. It projects a future where AI significantly influences the management of gastrointestinal bleeding, improving clinical decision-making, patient outcomes, and overall healthcare efficiency. The study advocates for a patient-centered approach in healthcare, balancing the incorporation of innovative technologies with ethical principles and the diverse needs of patients to optimize treatment efficacy and enhance healthcare accessibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.