258 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29103333)
1. Arterial lactate does not predict outcome better than existing risk scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Stokbro LA; Schaffalitzky de Muckadell OB; Laursen SB
Scand J Gastroenterol; 2018 May; 53(5):586-591. PubMed ID: 29103333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study.
Stanley AJ; Laine L; Dalton HR; Ngu JH; Schultz M; Abazi R; Zakko L; Thornton S; Wilkinson K; Khor CJ; Murray IA; Laursen SB;
BMJ; 2017 Jan; 356():i6432. PubMed ID: 28053181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of three scoring systems for risk stratification in elderly patients wıth acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Kalkan Ç; Soykan I; Karakaya F; Tüzün A; Gençtürk ZB
Geriatr Gerontol Int; 2017 Apr; 17(4):575-583. PubMed ID: 27075860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Scoring systems used to predict mortality in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ED.
Tang Y; Shen J; Zhang F; Zhou X; Tang Z; You T
Am J Emerg Med; 2018 Jan; 36(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 28673695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Risk stratification in acute upper GI bleeding: comparison of the AIMS65 score with the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring systems.
Robertson M; Majumdar A; Boyapati R; Chung W; Worland T; Terbah R; Wei J; Lontos S; Angus P; Vaughan R
Gastrointest Endosc; 2016 Jun; 83(6):1151-60. PubMed ID: 26515955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of three risk scores to predict outcomes in upper gastrointestinal bleeding; modifying Glasgow-Blatchford with albumin.
Shafaghi A; Gharibpoor F; Mahdipour Z; Samadani AA
Rom J Intern Med; 2019 Dec; 57(4):322-333. PubMed ID: 31268861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score and modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score in predicting outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding: An accuracy and calibration study.
Akhila Arya PV; Thulaseedharan NK; Raj R; Unnikrishnan DC; Jacob A
Indian J Gastroenterol; 2023 Aug; 42(4):496-504. PubMed ID: 37382854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. AIMS65 scoring system is comparable to Glasgow-Blatchford score or Rockall score for prediction of clinical outcomes for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Kim MS; Choi J; Shin WC
BMC Gastroenterol; 2019 Jul; 19(1):136. PubMed ID: 31349816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of the Glasgow-Blatchford and AIMS65 scoring systems for risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department.
Yaka E; Yılmaz S; Doğan NÖ; Pekdemir M
Acad Emerg Med; 2015 Jan; 22(1):22-30. PubMed ID: 25556538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring approaches in predicting the risk of in-hospital death among emergency hospitalized patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective observational study in Nanjing, China.
Gu L; Xu F; Yuan J
BMC Gastroenterol; 2018 Jun; 18(1):98. PubMed ID: 29954332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risk scoring systems to predict need for clinical intervention for patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding.
Chen IC; Hung MS; Chiu TF; Chen JC; Hsiao CT
Am J Emerg Med; 2007 Sep; 25(7):774-9. PubMed ID: 17870480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of AIMS65 Score and Other Scoring Systems for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Koreans with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Park SM; Yeum SC; Kim BW; Kim JS; Kim JH; Sim EH; Ji JS; Choi H
Gut Liver; 2016 Jul; 10(4):526-31. PubMed ID: 27377742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Validation of a new risk score system for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Kim MS; Moon HS; Kwon IS; Park JH; Kim JS; Kang SH; Sung JK; Lee ES; Kim SH; Lee BS; Jeong HY
BMC Gastroenterol; 2020 Jun; 20(1):193. PubMed ID: 32552662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of scoring systems without endoscopic findings for predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Ko IG; Kim SE; Chang BS; Kwak MS; Yoon JY; Cha JM; Shin HP; Lee JI; Kim SH; Han JH; Jeon JW
BMC Gastroenterol; 2017 Dec; 17(1):159. PubMed ID: 29233096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Comparison between Glascow-Blatchford, Rockall and AIMS65 scores in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a hospital in Lima, Peru].
Espinoza-Ríos J; Aguilar Sánchez V; Bravo Paredes EA; Pinto Valdivia J; Huerta-Mercado Tenorio J
Rev Gastroenterol Peru; 2016; 36(2):143-52. PubMed ID: 27409091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A prospective comparison of 3 scoring systems in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Wang CH; Chen YW; Young YR; Yang CJ; Chen IC
Am J Emerg Med; 2013 May; 31(5):775-8. PubMed ID: 23465874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Validity of modified early warning, Glasgow Blatchford, and pre-endoscopic Rockall scores in predicting prognosis of patients presenting to emergency department with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Bozkurt S; Köse A; Arslan ED; Erdoğan S; Üçbilek E; Çevik İ; Ayrık C; Sezgin O
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med; 2015 Dec; 23():109. PubMed ID: 26714636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of risk scoring systems in predicting clinical outcome at upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients in an emergency unit.
Dicu D; Pop F; Ionescu D; Dicu T
Am J Emerg Med; 2013 Jan; 31(1):94-9. PubMed ID: 23000328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of scoring systems for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a multicenter prospective cohort study.
Yang HM; Jeon SW; Jung JT; Lee DW; Ha CY; Park KS; Lee SH; Yang CH; Park JH; Park YS;
J Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2016 Jan; 31(1):119-25. PubMed ID: 26211939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Shock Index is not accurate at predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Saffouri E; Blackwell C; Laursen SB; Laine L; Dalton HR; Ngu J; Shultz M; Norton R; Stanley AJ
Aliment Pharmacol Ther; 2020 Jan; 51(2):253-260. PubMed ID: 31642558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
