ArticleThe American journal of gastroenterology2015
Polyp morphology: an interobserver evaluation for the Paris classification among international experts.
Article in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality indicators for colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Guideline
- Real-time use of artificial intelligence (CADEYE) in colorectal cancer surveillance of patients with Lynch syndrome-A randomized controlled pilot trial (CADLY).United European gastroenterology journal · 2023Trial
- Size, morphology, site, and access scoring variability as a barrier to standardization and automation.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- A Novel ex vivo Snare Tip Soft Coagulation Model for Deliberate Self-Practice and Assessing Endoscopic Tip-Control Competency: The HAM-2 Study.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Teaching Six "blink" features reduces general endoscopist cancer miss rate in image-based assessment of large colorectal polyps.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Interobserver Agreement for the Paris Classification of Colorectal Lesions Amongst Surgeons, Gastroenterologists, Trainees and Experts: A Video-Based Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Esophageal ESD Training; Perspective of West vs. East.Current gastroenterology reports · 2025Review
- Multiclassification of Colorectal Polyps from Colonoscopy Images Using AI for Early Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in the USA: The current state and future perspectives.DEN open · 2025Review
- Large language model for interpreting the Paris classification of colorectal polyps.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
- Spatial-attention ConvMixer architecture for classification and detection of gastrointestinal diseases using the Kvasir dataset.Health information science and systems · 2024Article
- Paris classification of colonic polyps using CT colonography: prospective cohort study of interobserver variation.European radiology · 2024Article
- Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Interobserver Reliability of the Paris Classification for Superficial Gastrointestinal Tract Neoplasms: A Systematic Review.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Advances in artificial intelligence and computer science for computer-aided diagnosis of colorectal polyps: current status.Endoscopy international open · 2023Review
- Usefulness of Contrast-Enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasound (CH-EUS) to Guide the Treatment Choice in Superficial Rectal Lesions: A Case Series.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Automated classification of polyps using deep learning architectures and few-shot learning.BMC medical imaging · 2023Article
- A multi-centre polyp detection and segmentation dataset for generalisability assessment.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Endoscopic characterization of neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions in inflammatory bowel disease: systematic review in the era of advanced endoscopic imaging.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe Paris classification is an international classification system for describing polyp morphology. Thus far, the validity and reproducibility of this classification have not been assessed. We aimed to determine the interobserver agreement for the Paris classification among seven Western expert endoscopists.
methodsA total of 85 short endoscopic video clips depicting polyps were created and assessed by seven expert endoscopists according to the Paris classification. After a digital training module, the same 85 polyps were assessed again. We calculated the interobserver agreement with a Fleiss kappa and as the proportion of pairwise agreement.
resultsThe interobserver agreement of the Paris classification among seven experts was moderate with a Fleiss kappa of 0.42 and a mean pairwise agreement of 67%. The proportion of lesions assessed as "flat" by the experts ranged between 13 and 40% (P<0.001). After the digital training, the interobserver agreement did not change (kappa 0.38, pairwise agreement 60%).
conclusionsOur study is the first to validate the Paris classification for polyp morphology. We demonstrated only a moderate interobserver agreement among international Western experts for this classification system. Our data suggest that, in its current version, the use of this classification system in daily practice is questionable and it is unsuitable for comparative endoscopic research. We therefore suggest introduction of a simplification of the classification system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25331346What 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.