The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Risk of aspirin-associated major upper-gastrointestinal bleeding with enteric-coated or buffered product
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Aspirin products are known to cause irritation and injury to the gastric mucosa. The belief that enteric-coated and buffered varieties are less likely to occasion major upper-gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) than plain aspirin was tested in data from a multicentre case-control study. METHODS: 550 incident cases of UGIB admitted to hospital with melaena or haematemesis and confirmed by endoscopy, and 1202 controls identified from population census lists, were interviewed about use of aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) during the 7 days before the onset of bleeding (cases) or interview (controls). Relative risks of UGIB for each type of aspirin used regularly (at least every other day) were calculated overall, and according to dose, by multiple logistic regression, with control for age, sex, marital status, date, education, cigarette smoking, alcohol use, and use of NSAIDs. FINDINGS: The relative risks of UGIB for plain, enteric-coated, and buffered aspirin at average daily doses of 325 mg or less were 2.6, 2.7, and 3.1, respectively. At doses greater than 325 mg, the relative risk was 5.8 for plain and 7.0 for buffered aspirin; there were insufficient data to evaluate enteric-coated aspirin at this dose level. There were no important differences in risk attributable to the three aspirin forms according to bleeding site (gastric vs duodenal), or when users of NSAIDs were excluded. INTERPRETATION: Use of low doses of enteric-coated or buffered aspirin carries a three-fold increase in the risk of major UGIB. The assumption that these formulations are less harmful than plain aspirin may be mistaken.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Patrono, C., Coller, B., Dalen, J. E., Fitz Gerald, G. A., Fuster, V., Gent, M., Hirsh, J., & Roth, G. (2001) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.119.1_suppl.39s · Cited by 963
Risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage with long term use of aspirin: meta-analysis
Derry, S. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7270.1183 · Cited by 677
Second Asia–Pacific Consensus Guidelines for Helicobacter pylori infection
Fock, K. M., Katelaris, P., Sugano, K., Ang, T. L., Hunt, R., Talley, N. J., Lam, S. K., Xiao, S., Tan, H. J., Wu, C., et al. (2009) · Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology · doi:10.1111/j.1440-1746.2009.05982.x · Cited by 554
Weitz, J. I., Eikelboom, J. W., & Samama, M. M. (2012) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.11-2294 · Cited by 527
Aspirin Dose for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review
Campbell, C. L., Smyth, S., Montalescot, G., & Steinhubl, S. R. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.297.18.2018 · Cited by 444
Metadata
- Authors
- Kelly, J. P., Kaufman, D. W., Jurgelon, J. M., Sheehan, J., Koff, R. S., & Shapiro, S.
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-11
- Volume
- 348
- Issue
- 9039
- Pages
- 1413-1416
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W2160363140
- Cited by
- 418
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risk of aspirin-associated major upper-gastrointestinal bleeding with enteric-coated or buffered product. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(96)01254-8
- The paper
- Kelly, J. P., Kaufman, D. W., Jurgelon, J. M., Sheehan, J., Koff, R. S., & Shapiro, S. (1996). Risk of aspirin-associated major upper-gastrointestinal bleeding with enteric-coated or buffered product. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(96)01254-8
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.