Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23044493›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in gastroenterology2013

Computed tomography colonography: emerging evidence to further support clinical effectiveness.

Perry J Pickhardt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Perry J PickhardtDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin 53792–3252, USA. ppickhardt2@uwhealth.org

Funding

Comparative Effectiveness of Virtual and Optical Colonoscopy for CRC SurveillanceR01CA155347 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI WEINBERG, DAVID S · 2011 to 2015
$3.3M
Virtual Colonoscopy and Colorectal Cancer ScreeningR01CA144835 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI PICKHARDT, PERRY, SMITH, MAUREEN A · 2010 to 2013
$2.1M
NCI NIH HHS 1R01CA144835NCI NIH HHS 1R01CA155347NCI NIH HHS R01 CA144835NCI NIH HHS R01 CA155347
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewComputed tomography colonography (CTC) continues to mature and evolve as a noninvasive imaging test of the large intestine. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the recent and emerging data that further supports the clinical effectiveness of CTC. RECENT

findingsThe diagnostic performance of CTC for detecting colorectal polyps and masses is well established, but its precise clinical role is yet to be determined. Recent data on test performance, patient acceptance, and study technique may help to clarify the role of CTC and accelerate its clinical implementation. SUMMARY: Recent advances and refinements in CTC should help to clarify and expand its clinical role, both as a screening and diagnostic test. High patient acceptance for CTC could lead to increased adherence rates. Ultimately, the complementary nature of CTC and optical colonoscopy should result in improved patient care.

Indexed as

Colonography, Computed TomographicColonic NeoplasmsColonic PolypsEarly Detection of CancerHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Compliance

Identifiers

PMID23044493
PMCPMC4031457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.