Gastric Cancer Screening Methods: A Comparative Study of the Chinese New Gastric Cancer Screening Score and Kyoto Classification of Gastritis

Table 4

Comparison of gastric atrophy and intestinal metaplasia results between the two scoring methods.

Scoring method/risk stratification	Gastric atrophy	values	Intestinal metaplasia	values
Chinese new gastric cancer screening scoring system (Li’s score)
Low risk (No. 585)	156 (26.67%)^¶	<0.001^a	129 (22.05%)^¶	<0.001^a
Medium risk (No. 93)	75 (80.65%)^★		75 (80.65%)^★
High risk (No. 24)	21 (88.89%)	<0.001^c	21 (88.89%)	<0.001^c
Kyoto classification of gastritis scoring system
Low risk (No. 384)	27 (7.03%)	<0.001^a	18 (4.69%)	<0.001^a
Medium risk (No. 171)	78 (45.61%)	<0.001^b	66 (38.60%)	<0.001^b
High risk (No. 147)	147 (100%)	<0.001^c	141 (95.92%)	<0.001^c

^aLow-risk group vs. medium-risk group; ^bmedium-risk group vs. high-risk group; ^chigh-risk group vs. low-risk group; ^¶low-risk group: Chinese new gastric cancer screening scoring system vs. Kyoto Classification of Gastritis scoring system, ; ^★medium-risk group: Chinese new gastric cancer screening scoring system vs. Kyoto Classification of Gastritis scoring system, . No.: case number.