ArticleGastrointestinal endoscopy2014
Impact of fair bowel preparation quality on adenoma and serrated polyp detection: data from the New Hampshire colonoscopy registry by using a standardized preparation-quality rating.
Article in Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- British Society of Gastroenterology position statement on serrated polyps in the colon and rectum.Gut · 2017Guideline
- Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Bowel Preparation on Adenoma Detection: Early Adenomas Affected Stronger than Advanced Adenomas.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Prevalence of missed lesions in patients with inadequate bowel preparation through a very early repeat colonoscopy.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2022Trial
- Will purposely seeking detect more colorectal polyps than routine performing during colonoscopy?Medicine · 2020Trial
- Factors Associated With Shorter Colonoscopy Surveillance Intervals for Patients With Low-Risk Colorectal Adenomas and Effects on Outcome.Gastroenterology · 2017Trial
- Trial
- To what extent can bowel preparation quality be considered "adequate"?: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Anatomical location of colorectal neoplasia in patients with positive stool test (multitarget stool deoxyribonucleic acid or fecal immunochemical test) results: data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2026Article
- A mobile app to improve adherence to colorectal cancer screening and post polypectomy surveillance guidelines.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Which is the better polyp detection metric: adenomas per colonoscopy or adenoma detection rate? A simulation modeling study.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Overall Polyp Detection Rate as a Surrogate Measure for Screening Efficacy Independent of Histopathology: Evidence from National Endoscopy Database.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Endoscopist adenomas-per-colonoscopy detection rates and risk for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Article
- Assessing Risk of Index Serrated Polyps.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2024Article
- Prevalence of neoplasia at colonoscopy among testicular cancer survivors treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.International journal of cancer · 2024Article
- A smartphone application to enhance bowel preparation for first-time colonoscopy: a randomized controlled study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- An Expert Consensus to Standardize Assessment of Bowel Cleansing for Clinical Trials of Bowel Preparations for Crohn's Disease.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
- Correlation between prescribing doctor attributes and intestinal cleanliness in colonoscopy: a study of 22522 patients.Annals of medicine · 2023Article
- Characteristics of Interval Colorectal Cancer: A Canadian Retrospective Population-Level Analysis from Newfoundland and Labrador.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Clinically significant serrated polyp detection rates and risk for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer: data from the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Article
- Improving sessile serrated adenoma detection rates with high definition colonoscopy: A retrospective study.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of colon preparation quality on adenoma detection rates (ADRs) is unclear, partly because of lack of uniform colon preparation ratings in prior studies. The New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry collects detailed data from colonoscopies statewide, by using a uniform preparation quality scale after the endoscopist has cleaned the mucosa.
objectiveTo compare the overall and proximal ADR and serrated polyp detection rates (SDR) in colonoscopies with differing levels of colon preparation quality.
designCross-sectional.
settingNew Hampshire statewide registry. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing colonoscopy.
interventionsWe examined colon preparation quality for 13,022 colonoscopies, graded by using specific descriptions provided to endoscopists. ADR and SDR are the number of colonoscopies with at least 1 adenoma or serrated polyp (excluding those in the rectum and/or sigmoid colon) detected divided by the total number of colonoscopies, for the preparation categories: optimal (excellent and/or good), fair, and poor. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Overall/proximal ADR/SDR.
resultsThe overall detection rates in examinations with fair colon preparation quality (SDR 8.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4-10.7, ADR 27.1%; 95% CI, 24.6-30.0) were similar to rates observed in colonoscopies with optimal preparation quality (SDR 8.8%; 95% CI, 8.3-9.4, ADR 26.3%; 95% CI, 25.6-27.2). This finding also was observed for rates in the proximal colon. A logistic regression model (including withdrawal time) found that proximal ADR was statistically lower in the poor preparation category (odds ratio 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24-0.84; P < .01) than in adequately prepared colons. LIMITATIONS: Homogeneous population.
conclusionIn our sample, there was no significant difference in overall or proximal ADR or SDR between colonoscopies with fair versus optimal colon preparation quality. Poor colon preparation quality may reduce the proximal ADR.
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.