ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2015
Individual polyp detection rate in routine daily endoscopy practice depends on case-mix.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aberrant Gene Expression Profile of Unaffected Colon Mucosa from Patients with Unifocal Colon Polyp.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe adenoma detection rate (ADR), a marker of endoscopic quality, is confounded by selection bias. It is not known what the ADR is in normal daily practice.
aimTo study the polyp detection rate (PDR) in different endoscopists in the course of years. PATIENTS AND
methodsAll consecutive endoscopies of the colon done in 11 years were included. Endoscopies in the regular surveillance programme after polyp removal and after surgery because of colorectal cancer or diverticular disease were scored separately. The number of yearly procedures per endoscopist and presence of polyps, anastomoses, surveillance and cancer were noted.
resultsIn the period of 11 years, 14,908 consecutive endoscopies of colon and rectum were done by four endoscopists. Two endoscopists had a significantly lower PDR than the other two (p < 0.001), these two had the longest careers in endoscopy. The two younger endoscopists did significantly less often procedures in patients with anastomoses and because of surveillance (p < 0.001, respectively). One endoscopist detected significantly less colorectal cancers than the other three endoscopists (p < 0.001).
conclusionThis study presents the PDR in normal routine daily endoscopy practice. It can be concluded that the PDR, implicating the ADR, in unselected patients can be lower in individual endoscopists than recommended in the literature. This highly depends on the case-mix of patients presented for endoscopy. This result debates the use of the ADR as quality indicator for individual endoscopists.
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.