ArticleEndoscopy international open2018
Does the PillCam SB3 capsule endoscopy system improve image reading efficiency irrespective of experience? A pilot study.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improved Efficiency and Lesion Detection in Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Using the Open-Source Artificial Intelligence Model SEE-AI.DEN open · 2027Article
- Combining the Variational and Deep Learning Techniques for Classification of Video Capsule Endoscopic Images.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Vision transformer distillation for enhanced gastrointestinal abnormality recognition in wireless capsule endoscopy images.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- UViT-Seg: An Efficient ViT and U-Net-Based Framework for Accurate Colorectal Polyp Segmentation in Colonoscopy and WCE Images.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- Robotic Pills as Innovative Personalized Medicine Tools: A Mini Review.Recent advances in drug delivery and formulation · 2024Review
- Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy: Experience from a single large tertiary care centre.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Video Capsule Endoscopy in Gastroenterology.Gastroenterology research · 2022Review
- Capsule Endoscopy: Pitfalls and Approaches to Overcome.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal endoscopy for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and new horizons.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Poor Quality of Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy Images Has a Significant Negative Effect in the Diagnosis of Small Bowel Malignancy.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2020Article
- The Usefulness of New-Generation Capsule Endoscopy in Patients with Portal Hypertensive Enteropathy.Clinical endoscopy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsThe aim of this study was tp compare the diagnostic efficiency of the PillCam SB3 capsule endoscopy (CE) system with the older system, PillCam SB2, taking into consideration the experience of the image reader. PATIENTS AND
methodsSmall intestinal CE was conducted on 64 patients around May 2014 when the SB3 was introduced in our hospital. Data obtained from 20 patients (SB2: 10 and SB3: 10) based on transit time were assessed by junior (experience: 20 images), intermediate (> 50), and expert readers (> 600).
resultsReading time with the CE down to the end of the small intestine was shorter in the SB3 group for each reader (SB2 vs. SB3: junior, 40.2 ± 10.1 vs. 23.7 ± 6.7 [
conclusionsThe PillCam SB3 reduces the time burden on readers irrespective of their experience.
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.