MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1869526

Медицинская библиотека · Frontiers in public health · 2026

Upper gastrointestinal endoscopic screening uptake and associated factors in East Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Liu Yanjie, He Yan, Zhao Yuan, Tian Wenhao, Pan Wanya, Guo Yunyu, Xie Meiling, Hua Jing, Feng Xiuqin

СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the pooled uptake of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic screening uptake and to identify factors associated with screening uptake among populations eligible for upper gastrointestinal endoscopic screening.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to identify studies reporting the uptake of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic screening and factors associated with screening participation. The pooled uptake was calculated using the random-effects model. For influencing factors, pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the I2 statistic. Subgroup analyses, meta-regression, leave-one-out sensitivity analysis, and publication bias assessment were performed to evaluate the robustness of the findings.

RESULTS

A total of 48 studies involving 119,913,685 participants were included in the meta-analysis of screening uptake. The pooled uptake of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic screening was 38% (95% CI: 28-48%), with substantial heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses showed that screening uptake differed significantly by country (p = 0.047) and sample size (p = 0.001). Meta-regression indicated that publication year and sample size were not significant moderators of screening uptake (all p > 0.05). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the pooled estimate remained stable after sequential omission of each study, and Egger's test did not indicate significant publication bias (p = 0.817). Among the 26 identified factors, 10 were included in the meta-analysis, and the remaining factors were summarized descriptively. The pooled results showed that female sex (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.07-1.27), higher education (OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.35-1.74), occupational exposure to hazards (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08-1.23), drinking shallow water (OR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.28-1.37), drinking deep well water (OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.05-1.40), a history of upper gastrointestinal diseases (OR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.72-2.20), a family history of upper gastrointestinal cancer (OR = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.29-1.74), and a family history of cancer (OR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.27-1.93) were associated with higher endoscopic screening uptake. In contrast, regular physical exercise (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.97) and current smoking (OR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.75-0.99) were associated with lower screening uptake.

CONCLUSION

The uptake of upper gastrointestinal endoscopic screening remains suboptimal among screening-eligible populations. Screening participation appears to be influenced by socioeconomic factors, lifestyle factors, disease-related factors, cognitive factors, healthcare-related factors. These findings may inform targeted interventions to improve screening uptake and optimize the implementation of upper gastrointestinal cancer screening programs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261279918, identifier CRD420261279918.

Для цитирования: Liu Yanjie, He Yan, Zhao Yuan, Tian Wenhao, Pan Wanya, Guo Yunyu, Xie Meiling, Hua Jing, Feng Xiuqin. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopic screening uptake and associated factors in East Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. Frontiers in public health. 2026. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1869526.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.