The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A systematic review of the staging performance of endoscopic ultrasound in gastro-oesophageal carcinoma
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) may be used for preoperative staging of gastro-oesophageal carcinoma but performance values given in the literature differ. AIMS: To identify and synthesise findings from all articles on the performance of EUS in tumour, node, metastasis (TNM) staging of gastro-oesophageal carcinoma. SOURCE: Published and unpublished English language literature, 1981–1996. METHODS: Data on the staging performance of EUS were retrieved and evaluated. Summary receiver operator characteristic methodology was used for synthesis, and a summary estimate of performance, Q*, obtained. Multiple regression analysis was used to assess study validity and investigate reasons for differences in performance. RESULTS: Twenty seven primary articles were assessed in detail. Thirteen supplied results for staging oesophageal cancer, 13 for gastric cancer, and four for cancers at the gastro-oesophageal junction. For gastric T staging, Q*=0.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91–0.95) and for oesophageal T staging, Q*=0.89 (95% CI 0.88–0.92). For gastro-oesophageal T staging, including cancers at the gastro-oesophageal junction, Q*=0.91 (95% CI 0.89–0.93). Inclusion of cases with non-traversable stenosis was found to slightly reduce staging performance. For N staging, Q*=0.79 (95% CI 0.75–0.83). In articles that compared EUS directly with incremental computed tomography, EUS performed better. None of the variables assessed in the regression analysis was significant using a Bonferroni correction. Three variables (anatomical location, traversability, and blinding) showed strong relationships for future research and validation. CONCLUSIONS: EUS is highly effective for discrimination of stages T1 and T2 from stages T3 and T4 for primary gastro-oesophageal carcinomas. The failure rate of EUS from non-traversability of a stenotic cancer may be a limitation in some patient groups.
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
Cites
TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours
(1987) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-82982-6 · Cited by 16,049
Practical Statistics for Medical Research.
Walter, S. D., & Altman, D. G. (1992) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532320 · Cited by 11,668
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
What's wrong with Bonferroni adjustments
Perneger, T. V. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7139.1236 · Cited by 5,900
Practical Statistics for Medical Research.
Bartko, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (1992) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290246 · Cited by 4,797
Rising incidence of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastric cardia
Blot, W. J. (1991) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.265.10.1287 · Cited by 2,354
Changing patterns in the incidence of esophageal and gastric carcinoma in the United States
Devesa, S. S., Blot, W. J., & Fraumeni, J. F. (1998) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19981115)83:10<2049::aid-cncr1>3.0.co;2-2 · Cited by 2,115
A Comparison of Multimodal Therapy and Surgery for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
Walsh, T. N., Noonan, N., Hollywood, D., Kelly, A., Keeling, N., & Hennessy, T. P. J. (1996) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199608153350702 · Cited by 1,950
Moses, L. E., Shapiro, D., & Littenberg, B. (1993) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780121403 · Cited by 1,405
TNM classification of malignant tumours
Cassoni, A. M. (1998) · Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1016/s0936-6555(98)80120-9 · Cited by 1,191
Cited by
Variation of a test’s sensitivity and specificity with disease prevalence
Leeflang, M. M. G., Rutjes, A. W. S., Reitsma, J. B., Hooft, L., & Bossuyt, P. M. M. (2013) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.121286 · Cited by 530
Preoperative Staging of Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Comparison of Helical CT and Endoscopic US
Habermann, C. R., Weiss, F., Riecken, R., Honarpisheh, H., Bohnacker, S., Staedtler, C., Dieckmann, C., Schoder, V., & Adam, G. (2004) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2302020828 · Cited by 261
Metadata
- Authors
- Kelly, S., Harris, K. M., Berry, E., Hutton, J., Roderick, P., Cullingworth, J., Gathercole, L., & Smith, M. A.
- Venue
- Gut
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2001-10-01
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 534-539
- ISSN
- 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-3288
- OpenAlex
- W2096810410
- Cited by
- 366
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 3.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: A systematic review of the staging performance of endoscopic ultrasound in gastro-oesophageal carcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.49.4.534
- The paper
- Kelly, S., Harris, K. M., Berry, E., Hutton, J., Roderick, P., Cullingworth, J., Gathercole, L., & Smith, M. A. (2001). A systematic review of the staging performance of endoscopic ultrasound in gastro-oesophageal carcinoma. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.49.4.534
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.