ArticleDiagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy2012
The learning curve of gastric intestinal metaplasia interpretation on the images obtained by probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy.
Article in Diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in Pediatric Diagnostic Endoscopy: A State-of-the-Art Review.JPGN reports · 2022Review
- Real-time semantic segmentation of gastric intestinal metaplasia using a deep learning approach.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Confocal laser endomicroscopy in gastro-intestinal endoscopy: technical aspects and clinical applications.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2022Review
- Reduced Intravenous Fluorescein Dose for Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Probe-Based Confocal Laser Endomicroscopy.Clinical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Advanced endoscopic imaging in gastric neoplasia and preneoplasia.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2017Article
- Diagnostic values of dual focus narrow band imaging and probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in FAP-related duodenal adenoma.Endoscopy international open · 2015Article
- Self-illuminating quantum dots for non-invasive bioluminescence imaging of mammalian gametes.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2015Article
- Endoscopic Raman Spectroscopy for Molecular Fingerprinting of Gastric Cancer: Principle to Implementation.BioMed research international · 2015Review
- Confocal microscopy in the esophagus and stomach.Clinical endoscopy · 2013Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background. Reading the results of gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) with probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) by the expert was excellent. There is a lack of study on the learning curve for GIM interpretation. Therefore, we conducted a study to explore the learning curve in the beginners. Material and Method. Five GI fellows who had no experience in GIM interpretation had been trained with a set of 10 pCLE video clips of GIM and non-GIM until they were able to interpret correctly. Then they were asked to interpret another 80 video clips of GIM and non-GIM. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV, and interobserver agreement on each session were analyzed. Results. Within 2 sessions, all beginners can achieve 80% accuracy with substantial to almost perfect level of interobserver agreement. The sensitivities and specificities among all interpreters were not different statistically. Four out of five interpreters can maintain their high quality of reading skill. Conclusion. After a short session of training on GIM interpretation of pCLE images, the beginners can achieve a high level of reading accuracy with at least substantial level of interobserver agreement. Once they achieve the high reading accuracy, almost all can maintain their high quality of reading skill.
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.