ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2018
Bowel preparation quality scales for colonoscopy.
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 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
111 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Advancements in Image-Based Analyses for Morphology and Staging of Colon Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.BioMed research international · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of ultra-low volume (≤1 L) bowel preparation fluids: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2022Pooled it
- Total Colonic Decompression Fails to Decrease Post- Colonoscopy Abdominal Pain: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Trial
- Clinical application of pre-rehabilitation concept on comfort colonoscopy in Chinese elderly patients: a randomised controlled trial.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Trial
- Low-residue diet with oral nutritional supplements prior to colonoscopy improves the quality of bowel preparation: an endoscopist-blinded, randomized controlled trial.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Trial
- Preoperative mechanical bowel preparation using conventional versus hyperosmolar polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution before laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer (TLUMP test): a phase III, multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.Journal of gastroenterology · 2023Trial
- Irrigating Acetic Acid Solution During Colonoscopy for the Detection of Sessile Serrated Neoplasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Trial
- Artificial Intelligence Algorithm-Based Differential Diagnosis of Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis by CT Image.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Trial
- Effects of a Personalized Smartphone App on Bowel Preparation Quality: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Trial
- Trial
- To what extent can bowel preparation quality be considered "adequate"?: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Review
- Addressing barriers: randomized trial of effect of video education on colonoscopy preparation in Cantonese/Mandarin-speaking patients.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2026Article
- Interobserver variability in colonoscopy quality assessment: a retrospective standardized multicenter video-based study.Archive of clinical cases · 2026Article
- Holmium vanadate nanoparticles as a biosafe and efficient contrast agent for spectral CT imaging of gastritis and colitis.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of real-time characterization in artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Evaluating quality indicators in colorectal cancer screening via fecal immunochemical tests: a five-year study from a developing country.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Research progress on intestinal preparation before colonoscopy.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Could artificial intelligence-powered colonoscopies change the future of colorectal cancer screening?World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Anal neoplasm in colonoscopy: What endoscopists need to know.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Colonoscopy is widely preferred for CRC screening and is the most commonly used method in the United States. Adequate bowel preparation is essential for successful colonoscopy CRC screening. However, up to one-quarter of colonoscopies are associated with inadequate bowel preparation, which may result in reduced polyp and adenoma detection rates, unsuccessful screens, and an increased likelihood of repeat procedure. In addition, standardized criteria and assessment scales for bowel preparation quality are lacking. While several bowel preparation quality scales are referred to in the literature, these differ greatly in grading methodology and categorization criteria. Published reliability and validity data are available for five bowel preparation quality assessment scales, which vary in several key attributes. However, clinicians and researchers continue to use a variety of bowel preparation quality measures, including nonvalidated scales, leading to potential confusion and difficulty when comparing quality results among clinicians and across clinical trials. Optimal clinical criteria for bowel preparation quality remain controversial. The use of validated bowel preparation quality scales with stringent but simple scoring criteria would help clarify clinical trial data as well as the performance of colonoscopy in clinical practice related to quality measurements.
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.