Trial reportGut2016
Leadership training to improve adenoma detection rate in screening colonoscopy: a randomised trial.
Trial report in Gut, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 75 papers, 6 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.
Quality Improvement in Screening Colonoscopy - a Randomized Trial of Tailored Training Intervention Versus Simple Feedback on the Quality Indicators.
Fast Track Module Based Colonoscopy Training Programme for Surgical Trainees at North Jutland Surgical Departments
Towards Painless Colonoscopy: a Dedicated Training to Decrease the Rate of Painful Colonoscopy - a Randomized Controlled Trial
Assistance for Optical Diagnosis of Neoplasia Using Artificial Intelligence (FAIR Study)
Who cites it
75 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Quality indicators for colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Guideline
- Identifying behaviour change techniques in 287 randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback interventions targeting practice change among healthcare professionals.Implementation science : IS · 2023Pooled it
- Identifying behaviour change techniques in 287 randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback interventions targeting practice change among healthcare professionals.Implementation science : IS · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence and Computer-Aided Diagnosis for the Detection and Characterization of Colorectal Polyps: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Training interventions to improve adenoma detection rates during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- The Effect of Intervention for Improving Colonoscopy Quality Is Associated with the Personality Traits of Endoscopists.Gut and liver · 2024Trial
- Using a dark logic model to explore adverse effects in audit and feedback: a qualitative study of gaming in colonoscopy.BMJ quality & safety · 2022Trial
- Efficacy of international web-based educational intervention in the detection of high-risk flat and depressed colorectal lesions higher (CATCH project) with a video: Randomized trial.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Multicomponent audit and feedback for colonoscopy quality improvement among potentially lower-performing endoscopists.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of AI-enhanced colonoscopy: A case-control study using real world evidence in a young screening age population.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association · 2026Article
- Physician adenoma detection rates and risk of post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer in a sequential screening programme: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- The Cost-Effectiveness of AI-Assisted Colonoscopy as a Primary or Secondary Screening Test in a Population-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program: Markov Modeling-Based Cost Effectiveness Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The implementation of computer-aided detection in an initial endoscopy training improves the quality measures of trainees' future colonoscopies: a retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Quantifying the cost savings and health impacts of improving colonoscopy quality: an economic evaluation.BMJ quality & safety · 2025Article
- Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer and the association with endoscopic findings in the Danish colorectal cancer screening programme.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Strategies to improve screening colonoscopy quality for the prevention of colorectal cancer.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2024Review
- Why is early detection of colon cancer still not possible in 2023?World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSuboptimal adenoma detection rate (ADR) at colonoscopy is associated with increased risk of interval colorectal cancer. It is uncertain how ADR might be improved. We compared the effect of leadership training versus feedback only on colonoscopy quality in a countrywide randomised trial.
design40 colonoscopy screening centres with suboptimal performance in the Polish screening programme (centre leader ADR ≤ 25% during preintervention phase January to December 2011) were randomised to either a Train-Colonoscopy-Leaders (TCLs) programme (assessment, hands-on training, post-training feedback) or feedback only (individual quality measures). Colonoscopies performed June to December 2012 (early postintervention) and January to December 2013 (late postintervention) were used to calculate changes in quality measures. Primary outcome was change in leaders' ADR. Mixed effect models using ORs and 95% CIs were computed.
resultsThe study included 24,582 colonoscopies performed by 38 leaders and 56,617 colonoscopies performed by 138 endoscopists at the participating centres. The absolute difference between the TCL and feedback groups in mean ADR improvement of leaders was 7.1% and 4.2% in early and late postintervention phases, respectively. The TCL group had larger improvement in ADR in early (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.01; p<0.001) and late (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.66; p=0.004) postintervention phases. In the late postintervention phase, the absolute difference between the TCL and feedback groups in mean ADR improvement of entire centres was 3.9% (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.50; p=0.017).
conclusionsTeaching centre leaders in colonoscopy training improved important quality measures in screening colonoscopy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01667198.
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.