ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2016
Seeing better--Evidence based recommendations on optimizing colonoscopy adenoma detection rate.
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of shared decision-making in guidelines about colorectal cancer screening.European journal of cancer care · 2022Pooled it
- Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Personalized Surveillance After Colorectal Adenomatous Polypectomy.Epidemiologic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Will purposely seeking detect more colorectal polyps than routine performing during colonoscopy?Medicine · 2020Trial
- Impact of real-time artificial intelligence integration on detection of gastric lesions: an exploratory single-center before-and-after study using low-definition routine endoscopy.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Adenoma Detection and the Endoscopist: Assessing the Effects of Insourcing in UK Endoscopy Services.Cureus · 2025Article
- Characteristics of Interval Colorectal Cancer: A Canadian Retrospective Population-Level Analysis from Newfoundland and Labrador.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Weekend and evening planned colonoscopy activity: a safe and effective way to meet demands.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
- Medical needs related to the endoscopic technology and colonoscopy for colorectal cancer diagnosis.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Declining detection rates for APC and biallelic MUTYH variants in polyposis patients, implications for DNA testing policy.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2020Article
- Does the withdrawal time affect adenoma detection in non-screening colonoscopies?Frontline gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Efficacy and safety of cold forceps polypectomy utilizing the jumbo cup: a prospective study.Intestinal research · 2019Article
- Efficacy of 1.2 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid for bowel preparations.World journal of clinical cases · 2019Article
- Article
- Annual colonoscopy volume and maintenance of competency for surgeons.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Is the level of cleanliness using segmental Boston bowel preparation scale associated with a higher adenoma detection rate?Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
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
Colorectal cancer is one of the three most frequent causes of cancer deaths in men and women in Europe and North America. Diagnosis and resection of adenomas has convincingly demonstrated its utility in diminishing colorectal cancer incidence. Therefore, colonoscopy is now the gold standard for colorectal cancer screening. But it is also known that colonoscopy effectiveness varies among endoscopists. Among different quality indicators, the most used is the adenoma detection rate (ADR) which is the percentage of average-risk patients for colorectal cancer who are found to have at least one adenoma or adenocarcinoma during a screening colonoscopy. There is compelling evidence supporting an inverse correlation between ADR and interval colorectal cancer (cancer found after a screening colonoscopy). Many factors such as quality of precolonoscopy preparation, additional observers, manoeuvres with the endoscope (second view, retroflexion, water inflation rather than air), time spent during withdrawal, changes in patient position, fold-flattener devices, new imaging or endoscopic modalities and use of intravenous or through the scope sprayed drugs, have been studied and developed with the aim of increasing the ADR. This reviews discusses these factors, and the current evidence, to "see better" in the colon and optimize 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.