ArticleJournal of clinical gastroenterology2025
Endoscopic Surveillance of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of clinical gastroenterology, 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.
- Underreporting of Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia Due to Underutilization of Diagnostic Codes.Gastro hep advances · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is a precancerous condition. Limited data exist on real-world clinical practice relative to guidelines.
aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to GIM risk stratification and identify factors associated with follow-up endoscopy. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted manual chart review of patients with histologically confirmed GIM at an urban, tertiary medical center were identified retrospectively and details of their demographics, Helicobacter pylori , biopsy protocol, endoscopic/histologic findings, and postendoscopy follow-up were recorded. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors independently associated with follow-up endoscopy.
resultsAmong 253 patients, 59% were female, 37% non-Hispanic White (NHW), 26% Hispanic, 16% non-Hispanic Black (NHB). The median age at index endoscopy was 63.4 years (IQR: 55.9 to 70.0), with median follow-up of 65.1 months (IQR: 44.0 to 72.3). H. pylori was detected in 21.6% patients at index EGD. GIM extent and subtype data were frequently missing (22.9% and 32.8%, respectively). Based on available data, 26% had corpus-extended GIM and 28% had incomplete/mixed-type GIM. Compared with NHW, Hispanic patients had higher odds of follow-up EGD (OR=2.48, 95% CI: 1.23-5.01), while NHB patients had 59% lower odds of follow-up EGD (OR=0.41, 95% CI: 0.18-0.96). Corpus-extended GIM versus limited GIM (OR=2.27, 95% CI: 1.13-4.59) was associated with follow-up EGD, but GIM subtype and family history of gastric cancer were not.
conclusionsWe observed suboptimal risk stratification among patients with GIM and notable race and ethnic disparities with respect to endoscopic surveillance. Targeted interventions are needed to improve practice patterns and mitigate observed disparities.
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.