ArticleBMJ open2019
Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancers identified by probabilistic and deterministic linkage: results in an Australian prospective cohort.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing data linkage for maximizing the potential of Luxembourg's national cancer registry: a comprehensive scoping review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Costs and benefits of a formal quality framework for colonoscopy: Economic evaluation.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Can an educational video improve the adequacy of bowel preparation for patients undergoing their first colonoscopy? Results of the EBOPS RCT.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Article
- Is it time we split bowel preparation for all colonoscopies? Outcomes from a national survey of bowel preparation practice in the UK.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Guidelines for accreditation of endoscopy units: quality measures from the Korean Society of Coloproctology.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2021Article
- Risk stratification for advanced colorectal neoplasia based on the findings of the index and first surveillance colonoscopies.PloS one · 2021Article
- The Relationship between Post-colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer and Quality Indicators of Colonoscopy: The Latest Single-center Cohort Study with a Review of the Literature.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePost-colonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs) are recognised as a critical quality indicator. Benchmarking of PCCRC rate has been hampered by the strong influence of different definitions and methodologies. We adopted a rigorous methodology with high-detail individual data to determine PCCRC rates in a prospective cohort representing a single jurisdiction.
settingWe performed a cohort study of individuals who underwent colonoscopy between 2001 and 2008 at a single centre serving Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and enclaving New South Wales (NSW) region. These individuals were linked to subsequent colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis, within 5 years of a negative colonoscopy, through regional cancer registries and hospital records using probabilistic and deterministic record linkage. All cases were verified by pathology review. Predictors of PCCRCs were extracted.
participants7818 individuals had a colonoscopy in the cohort. Linkage to cancer registries detected 384 and 98 CRCs for notification dates of 2001-2013 (ACT) and 2001-2010 (NSW). A further 55 CRCs were identified from a search of electronic medical records using International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnosis codes. After verification and exclusions, 385/537 CRCs (58% male) were included. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: PCCRC rates.
resultsThere were 15 PCCRCs in our cohort. The PCCRC incidence rate was 0.384/1000 person-years and the 5-year PCCRC risk was estimated as 0.192% (95% CI 0.095 to 0.289). The index colonoscopy prior to PCCRC was more likely to show diverticulosis (p=0.017 for association, OR 3.56, p=0.014) and have poor bowel preparation (p=0.017 for association, OR 4.19, p=0.009).
conclusionIn this population-based cohort study, the PCCRC incidence rate was 0.384/1000 person-years and the 5-year PCCRC risk was 0.192%. These data show the 'real world' accuracy of colonoscopy for CRC exclusion.
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.