SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2019
Outcomes at follow-up of negative colonoscopy in average risk population: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk-adapted intervals for colorectal cancer screening using fecal immunochemical tests: a modelling study based on the BLITZ cohort.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer Risk With Negative Colonoscopy or Nonadherence After Positive FOBT Screening.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Human-machine collaboration in colorectal cancer screening: a narrative review of artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Potential for enhancing efficacy of screening colonoscopy by lowering starting ages and extending screening intervals: A modelling study for Germany.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Reduction in colorectal cancer incidence by screening endoscopy.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2024Review
- Potential Impact of Extending Surveillance Intervals for Patients With 1-2 Low-Risk Adenomas.Gastro hep advances · 2023Review
- Insights into the quantification and reporting of model-related uncertainty across different disciplines.iScience · 2022Review
- IGFBP5 is Upregulated and Associated with Poor Prognosis in Colorectal Cancer.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Follow-up outcomes in patients with negative initial colon capsule endoscopy findings.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021Article
- Gastrointestinal cancers in China, the USA, and Europe.Gastroenterology report · 2021Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo review and summarise the evidence on the prevalence of colorectal adenomas and cancers at a follow-up screening colonoscopy after negative index colonoscopy, stratified by interval between examinations and by sex.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis of all available studies. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Two investigators independently extracted characteristics and results of identified studies and performed standardised quality ratings. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies assessing the outcome of a follow-up colonoscopy among participants at average risk for colorectal cancer with a negative previous colonoscopy (no adenomas).
results28 studies were identified, including 22 cohort studies, five cross sectional studies, and one case-control study. Findings for an interval between colonoscopies of one to five, five to 10, and more than 10 years were reported by 17, 16, and three studies, respectively. Summary estimates of prevalences of any neoplasm were 20.7% (95% confidence interval 15.8% to 25.5%), 23.0% (18.0% to 28.0%), and 21.9% (14.9% to 29.0%) for one to five, five to 10, and more than 10 years between colonoscopies. Corresponding summary estimates of prevalences of any advanced neoplasm were 2.8% (2.0% to 3.7%), 3.2% (2.2% to 4.1%), and 7.0% (5.3% to 8.7%). Seven studies also reported findings stratified by sex. Summary estimates stratified by interval and sex were consistently higher for men than for women.
conclusionsAlthough detection of any neoplasms was observed in more than 20% of participants within five years of a negative screening colonoscopy, detection of advanced neoplasms within 10 years was rare. Our findings suggest that 10 year intervals for colonoscopy screening after a negative colonoscopy, as currently recommended, may be adequate, but more studies are needed to strengthen the empirical basis for pertinent recommendations and to investigate even longer intervals. STUDY REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42019127842.
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.