ArticleJournal of gastric cancer2026
Agreement, Compliance, and Practice Change of the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: A Nationwide Multidisciplinary Survey.
Article in Journal of gastric 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022 were developed using a rigorous, multidisciplinary, and evidence-based approach. However, their real-world acceptance and implementation have not yet been formally evaluated. This study assessed agreement, compliance, and practice changes associated with strong guideline recommendation statements. MATERIALS AND
methodsA nationwide anonymous survey was conducted between August and November 2025 among specialists involved in gastric cancer care. Of the 40 recommendation statements addressing the 33 key questions, 18 strong recommendations were evaluated. Respondents rated agreement, compliance, and practice change using a 5-point Likert scale and provided quantitative estimates of compliance and practice change rates.
resultsA total of 103 physicians participated, and 100 specialists were included in the main analyses. Most respondents worked at tertiary hospitals (72.8%), and 61.2% had more than 10 years of experience in gastric cancer care. Overall, 93.2% agreed that the guidelines were high-quality, evidence-based documents, and 80.6% reported that they were highly useful in clinical practice. Across the 18 strong recommendation statements, qualitative agreement ranged from 78.5% to 100%, compliance from 60.0% to 100%, and reported practice changes from 11.4% to 40.9%. On average, 95.9% agreed with the recommendations, 92.1% reported compliance, and 23.2% reported a practice change. In the quantitative assessment, the mean compliance rate was 89.7%, and the mean practice change rate was 14.3%.
conclusionsThe guidelines showed high agreement and compliance among the multidisciplinary specialists. Although changes in practice were relatively limited, the guidelines contributed to selected clinical improvements and promoted the standardization of evidence-based practices.
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.