What is the prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings in subjects with dyspepsia? Systematic review and meta-analysis.

@article{Ford2010WhatIT,
  title={What is the prevalence of clinically significant endoscopic findings in subjects with dyspepsia? Systematic review and meta-analysis.},
  author={Alexander Charles Ford and Avantika Marwaha and Allen Lim and Paul M Moayyedi},
  journal={Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association},
  year={2010},
  volume={8 10},
  pages={830-7, 837.e1-2}
}
BACKGROUND & AIMS Evolving definitions of dyspepsia may lead to differences in the prevalence of clinically significant findings encountered at upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy in sufferers. However, few studies report the prevalence of endoscopic findings in individuals with dyspepsia. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis examining this. METHODS MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through April 2010 to identify relevant articles (23,457 citations). Eligible studies recruited… CONTINUE READING

Citations

Publications citing this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 43 extracted citations

Endoscopic findings in uninvestigated dyspepsia

BMC gastroenterology • 2014
View 5 Excerpts
Highly Influenced

Reply to Drs. Pellicano and Ford

The American Journal of Gastroenterology • 2018
View 1 Excerpt

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…