ArticleBMC gastroenterology2012
Capsule colonoscopy increases uptake of colorectal cancer screening.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Second-generation capsule endoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps: An updated systematic review and comparative meta-analysis of prospective studies.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Pooled it
- Follow-up endoscopy rates as an indicator of effectiveness in colon capsule endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Pooled it
- Acceptability of alternative technologies compared with faecal immunochemical test and/or colonoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: A systematic review.Journal of medical screening · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Wireless Capsule Endoscopy in Polyp Recognition Using Deep Learning: A Meta-Analysis.International journal of clinical practice · 2022Pooled it
- Colorectal Cancer Screening in Average Risk Populations: Evidence Summary.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2016Pooled it
- Colon capsule endoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Trial
- Fundamentals of Bowel Cancer for Biomedical Engineers.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2023Review
- Advances in colon capsule endoscopy: a review of current applications and challenges.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Colon Capsule Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Colon Polyps: Who Needs a Colonoscopy?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Performance of a Deep Learning System for Automatic Diagnosis of Protruding Lesions in Colon Capsule Endoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Deep learning and colon capsule endoscopy: automatic detection of blood and colonic mucosal lesions using a convolutional neural network.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Colon capsule endoscopy in colorectal cancer screening: Interim analyses of randomized controlled trial CareForColon2015.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes and Preferences for Colon Capsule Endoscopy and Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Second-generation colon capsule endoscopy for detection of colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.Endoscopy international open · 2021Review
- Colon Capsule Endoscopy: Indications, Findings, and Complications - Data from a Prospective German Colon Capsule Registry Trial (DEKOR).Clinical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Article
- Robotic colonoscopy: efficacy, tolerability and safety. Preliminary clinical results from a pilot study.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Accuracy of Colon Capsule Endoscopy for Colorectal Neoplasia Detection in Individuals Referred for a Screening Colonoscopy.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2019Article
- Colorectal Cancer Screening-Who, How, and When?Clinical endoscopy · 2018Review
- Rapid review of evaluation of interventions to improve participation in cancer screening services.Journal of medical screening · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScreening colonoscopy effectiveness is hampered by limited adherence by the general population. The present prospective study was performed to evaluate whether adding capsule colonoscopy to the endoscopic screening options increases uptake.
methodsInvitation letters were sent to 2150 persons above the age of 55 insured with a German medical insurance company in the area of Rinteln, Lower Saxony with a baseline spontaneous annual screening colonoscopy uptake of 1 %. Both capsule or conventional colonoscopy were offered. Interested persons were given information about the two screening options by four local gastroenterologists and examinations were then performed according to screenees' final choice.
results154 persons sought further information, and 34 and 90 underwent conventional and capsule colonoscopy, respectively. Colonoscopy uptake was thus increased by the invitation process by 60 % (1.6 % vs. 1 %; p = 0.075), while the option of capsule endoscopy led to a fourfold increase of screening uptake (4.2 % vs. 1 %, p < 0.001). Despite similar age distribution in both sex groups, uptake in men was significantly higher (5.6 % vs. 2.8 %, p = 002). However, overall adenoma yield was not different in both groups.
conclusionsThe present study suggests that offering the option of capsule colonoscopy increases uptake of endoscopic colorectal cancer screening. However, capsule endoscopy sensitivity for adenoma detection needs to be improved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.