Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23885144›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013

Optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps using high-definition i-scan: an educational experience.

Mariëlle W E Bouwens, Rogier de Ridder, Ad A M Masclee, Ann Driessen, Robert G Riedl, Bjorn Winkens, Silvia Sanduleanu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Image enhanced colonoscopy: updates and prospects-a review.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

7 authors.

Mariëlle W E BouwensDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Rogier de Ridder
Ad A M Masclee
Ann Driessen
Robert G Riedl
Bjorn Winkens
Silvia Sanduleanu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo examine performances regarding prediction of polyp histology using high-definition (HD) i-scan in a group of endoscopists with varying levels of experience.

methodsWe used a digital library of HD i-scan still images, comprising twin pictures (surface enhancement and tone enhancement), collected at our university hospital. We defined endoscopic features of adenomatous and non-adenomatous polyps, according to the following parameters: color, surface pattern and vascular pattern. We familiarized the participating endoscopists on optical diagnosis of colorectal polyps using a 20-min didactic training session. All endoscopists were asked to evaluate an image set of 50 colorectal polyps with regard to polyp histology. We classified the diagnoses into high confidence (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist could assign a diagnosis with certainty) and low confidence diagnoses (i.e., cases in which the endoscopist preferred to send the polyp for formal histology). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy per endoscopist/image were computed and differences between groups tested using independent-samples t tests. High vs low confidence diagnoses were compared using the paired-samples t test.

resultsEleven endoscopists without previous experience on optical diagnosis evaluated a total of 550 images (396 adenomatous, 154 non-adenomatous). Mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing adenomas were 79.3%, 85.7% and 81.1%, respectively. No significant differences were found between gastroenterologists and trainees regarding performances of optical diagnosis (mean accuracy 78.0% vs 82.9%, P = 0.098). Diminutive lesions were predicted with a lower mean accuracy as compared to non-diminutive lesions (74.2% vs 93.1%, P = 0.008). A total of 446 (81.1%) diagnoses were made with high confidence. High confidence diagnoses corresponded to a significantly higher mean accuracy than low confidence diagnoses (84.0% vs 64.3%, P = 0.008). A total of 319 (58.0%) images were evaluated as having excellent quality. Considering excellent quality images in conjunction with high confidence diagnosis, overall accuracy increased to 92.8%.

conclusionAfter a single training session, endoscopists with varying levels of experience can already provide optical diagnosis with an accuracy of 84.0%.

Indexed as

EndoscopesAdenomatous PolypsColonic NeoplasmsColonic PolypsColonoscopyGastroenterologyHumansObserver VariationPattern Recognition, VisualPilot ProjectsPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsTime FactorsColonoscopyColorectal polypsHigh-definition i-scanOptical diagnosisTraining

Identifiers

PMID23885144
PMCPMC3718901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.