ArticleDEN open2026
When Endoscopic Sedation is Not an Option: Insights From a Multicenter on-site Survey on Tolerance for Japanese Gastric Cancer Screening.
Article in DEN open, 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
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is widely used for gastric cancer (GC) screening in Japan; however, sedation during EGD is not recommended. We aimed to assess the tolerability of unsedated EGD (USEGD) in the Japanese population. Methods: Participants who underwent GC screening in Japanese urban areas between July 2021 and December 2022 were included in this study. We conducted a real-time questionnaire survey on USEGD invasiveness in 16 clinics and hospitals. Participants completed a self-report questionnaire, including a six-point face scale, immediately after undergoing USEGD with an ultrathin endoscope for GC screening, and were placed into the tolerable (T group) or intolerable groups (I group) based on the scores 1-3 and 4-6 on the face scale, respectively. Results: The 1021 participants (median age, 59 years; interquartile range, 59-74 years) consisted of 561 men and 437 women, while 23 preferred not to answer. Of the 777 participants who underwent USEGD using an ultrathin endoscope, 135 (17.4%) were categorized into the intolerable (I) group based on severe distress, and 642 (82.6%) into the tolerable (T) group. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that older age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.974; Conclusions: USEGD was generally well-tolerated; however, some participants found it intolerable, even with transnasal endoscopy. Supportive measures for these individuals are essential for sustaining effective screening programs.
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.