Observational studyGut and liver2019
Usefulness of Personal Bowel Habits as a Predictive Factor for Inadequate Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Prospective Questionnaire-Based Observational Study.
Observational study in Gut and liver, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Educating Outpatients for Bowel Preparation Before Colonoscopy Using Conventional Methods vs Virtual Reality Videos Plus Conventional Methods: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2021Trial
- Derivation and validation of a prediction model for inadequate bowel preparation in Chinese outpatients.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Importance of Bowel Habits in Predicting Inadequate Bowel Preparation: A Prospective Observational Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Observational
- Taking a Long and Hard Look at Quality Predictors of Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: The quality of bowel preparation is important for optimal colonoscopy. It is influenced by medical and personal factors. We aimed to evaluate the effect of bowel habit on the quality of bowel preparation and to identify predictors of inadequate bowel preparation among bowel habit factors. Methods: From June 2017 to September 2017, 90 volunteers were enrolled in this study. Each participant answered a questionnaire consisting of multiple questions about personal bowel habits, including stool form, frequency of bowel movements per week, duration, and degree of straining for bowel movement. Then, all volunteers underwent colonoscopic exam. Eleven endoscopists performed colonoscopies and used the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) as the index for bowel preparation. Two expert endoscopists simultaneously reviewed all colonoscopic images to confirm the final BBPS. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to verify the correlation between bowel preparation adequacy and bowel habit. Results: : Among the 90 participants, 20 (22.2%) had inadequate bowel preparation (total BBPS ≤6 or any segmental BBPS ≤1). In univariate analysis, infrequent bowel movement (0-2/week) (odds ratio [OR], 12.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22 to 129, p=0.03) and moderate straining (more than 1/4 of defecations) (OR, 4.40; 95% CI, 1.44 to 13.39; p=0.01) were significantly associated with inadequate bowel preparation. However, only moderate straining was significantly associated with inadequate bowel preparation in multivariate analysis (OR, 3.99; 95% CI, 1.26 to 12.65; p=0.02). Conclusions: Straining is a significant predictor for inadequate bowel preparation. For patients with straining during bowel movements, an intensified preparation regimen should be considered.
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.