ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2018
Intra and inter-observer agreement on polyp detection in colon capsule endoscopy evaluations.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Colon capsule endoscopy versus CT colonography after incomplete colonoscopy. Application of artificial intelligence algorithms to identify complete colonic investigations.United European gastroenterology journal · 2020Trial
- Inter- and Intra-Observer Reliability for Colon Capsule CLEansing Assessment and Report.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Expected Values of Artificial Intelligence in Colon Capsule Endoscopy: Artificial Intelligence in Capsule Endoscopy Consortium Position Statement.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Neoplasms in the Nasal Cavity Identified and Tracked with an Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Nasal Endoscopic Diagnostic System.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Polyp Matching in Colon Capsule Endoscopy: Pioneering CCE-Colonoscopy Integration Towards an AI-Driven Future.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Robotic wireless capsule endoscopy: recent advances and upcoming technologies.Nature communications · 2024Review
- Bowel cleansing quality evaluation in colon capsule endoscopy: what is the reference standard?Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Rationalizing polyp matching criteria in colon capsule endoscopy: an international expert consensus through RAND (modified DELPHI) process.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Interobserver agreement between an artificial intelligence algorithm and colon capsule endoscopy readers on bowel-cleansing quality.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2023Article
- Advances in colon capsule endoscopy: a review of current applications and challenges.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Inter/Intra-Observer Agreement in Video-Capsule Endoscopy: Are We Getting It All Wrong? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Colon Capsule Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Colon Polyps: Who Needs a Colonoscopy?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Colon Capsule Endoscopy-A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Colon Capsule Endoscopy: Indications, Findings, and Complications - Data from a Prospective German Colon Capsule Registry Trial (DEKOR).Clinical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Time-saving polyp detection in colon capsule endoscopy: evaluation of a novel software algorithm.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColon capsule endoscopy is a promising technique for evaluation of the colon, but its reproducibility is still unknown.
objectiveThis study assesses intra and inter-observer agreement in evaluations of colon capsule endoscopy videos.
methodsForty-two complete colon capsule endoscopy investigations were analysed by three experts and two beginners. Intra-observer agreement was assessed in paired readings of two experts and two beginners. Agreement was determined by the intraclass correlation coefficient: poor (<0.5), moderate (0.5-0.75), good (0.75-0.9) and excellent (>0.9).
resultsAgreement on 'indication for a following colonoscopy' based on the number and size of detected polyps and bowel cleansing quality was poor among all observers. Agreement among experts on the detection of large polyps and number of polyps was moderate, but agreement on bowel cleansing quality was poor. Beginners were in moderate agreement with the experts on polyp detection. Intra-observer agreement in experts was moderate to excellent for the detection of large polyps (≥10 mm), excellent for the number of polyps, and poor to moderate for bowel cleansing quality. Intra-observer agreement in beginners was poor to moderate for all variables.
conclusionsThis study shows a poor agreement on 'indication for a following colonoscopy', but a high intra and inter-observer agreement for polyp detection among experts, as well as a moderate agreement between beginners and experts.
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.