ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2020
Impact of a Citywide Benchmarking Intervention on Colonoscopy Quality Performance.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated detection of cecal intubation with variable bowel preparation using a deep convolutional neural network.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere is marked variability in colonoscopy quality, limiting its effectiveness in colorectal cancer prevention. Multiple indicators have been established as markers for colonoscopy quality; however, there are conflicting data on the effects of quality reporting programs on endoscopist performance. In this study, we investigate the impact of a multicenter quarterly report card initiative on colonoscopy quality metric performance.
methodsData were collected from 194 endoscopists at 10 participating sites throughout New York City using a Qualified Clinical Data Registry from January 2013 to December 2014. Adenoma detection rate (ADR), cecal intubation rate, withdrawal time, bowel preparation quality and appropriate interval recommendations were tracked. Report cards were distributed to each site on a quarterly basis and technical assistance was provided as needed. Performance trends were analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage trend and analysis of variance tests.
results37,258 screening colonoscopies were performed during the study period. There was a positive performance trend for ADR over time from the first quarter of 2013 to the last quarter of 2014 (15.6-25.7%; p < 0.001). There were also increases in cecal intubation rates (78.2-92.6%; p < 0.001), bowel preparation adequacy rates (77.5-92.8%; p < 0.001), and adherence to appropriate screening intervals (28.0-55.0%; p < 0.001). There was no clinically significant change in mean withdrawal time.
conclusionsThe implementation of a quarterly report card initiative resulted in statistically significant improvements in adenoma detection, cecal intubation, bowel preparation adequacy rates, and appropriate recommended screening intervals.
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.