Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25567171›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of gastroenterology2015

Trouble in Paris (classification): polyp morphology is in the eye of the beholder.

Samir Gupta

Abstract readEditorialComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A step-by-step guide to approaching colon polyps.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2023
    Article
  2. Large polyps: Pearls for the referring and receiving endoscopist.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Current strategies for malignant pedunculated colorectal polyps.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2018
    Review
  5. Colorectal Cancer in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2018
    Review
  6. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Samir Gupta1] Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California, USA [2] The Division of Gastroenterology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.

Funding

Optimizing Colorectal Cancer and Polyp Surveillance after Colorectal PolypectomyI01HX001574 · VA · VA SAN DIEGO HEALTHCARE SYSTEM · PI GUPTA, SAMIR · 2015 to 2019
–
HSRD VA I01 HX001574
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Key challenges to colonoscopy outcomes include polyp detection, appropriate polyp resection, and prediction of recurrent polyps. The Paris classification of gastrointestinal neoplasia has been used to attempt to address these challenges based on the hypothesis that the visual appearance of a polyp (e.g., sessile, flat, depressed) has an impact on these outcomes. Although the Paris classification has been widely used as a measurement tool in research, and reported to predict outcomes such as risk for high-grade dysplasia and invasive carcinoma, interobserver variability associated with this classification scheme has not been studied. In the current issue of the Red Journal, van Doorn et al. studied the interobserver variation of Paris classification in 85 colorectal polyps assessed by seven expert colonoscopists. They found that interobserver variation measured by kappa was only moderate (kappa=0.42; 95% confidence interval: 0.39-0.45). These findings suggest that without methods to improve interobserver variability, the Paris classification cannot routinely be used for research or routine practice. New approaches to characterizing polyp appearance may be required to use morphology as a predictor of clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Colonic PolypsHumans

Identifiers

PMID25567171

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.