ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2018
Is there a difference in adenoma detection rates between gastroenterologists and surgeons?
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical endoscopy a historical perspective for the future.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Review
- Article
- Quality of colonoscopy performed by medical or surgical specialists and trainees in five Australian hospitals.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Article
- Impact of looping on premalignant polyp detection during colonoscopy.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Article
- Impact of the National Endoscopy Database (NED) on colonoscopy withdrawal time: a tertiary centre experience.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Endoscopy in surgery.Turkish journal of surgery · 2021Article
- 10 reasons why surgeons should continue performing flexible endoscopy.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the adenoma detection rate (ADR) between gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons at Box Hill Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
methodsA total of 300 colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons at Box Hill Hospital were retrospectively reviewed from May 2016 to June 2017. Exclusion criteria were: Patients ≤ 50 years old, colonoscopies with failure of caecal intubation, patients who previously had colon cancer and/or a colonic resection, history of polyposis syndromes or inflammatory bowel disease, or a colonoscopy within the last 10 years. Patient demographics, indications, symptoms and procedural-related outcomes were measured.
resultsThe ADR was not significantly different between gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons (34%
conclusionBoth specialties at our institution exceed benchmark standards suggested by published Australian and American guidelines. An association between endoscopist specialty and ADR was not observed.
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.