ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2020
Frontiers of Robotic Colonoscopy: A Comprehensive Review of Robotic Colonoscopes and Technologies.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 105 citations in OpenAlex.
- Flexible robotic platforms for surgical applications in microgravity environments: a comprehensive systematic review of minimally invasive mechatronic systems and the impact of artificial intelligence on behalf of the Center for Space Systems (C-SET) & TROGSS-The Robotic Global Surgical Society.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Endoluminal Procedures and Devices for Esophageal Tract Investigation: A Critical Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Automation dependence in AI-assisted colonoscopy: impact of system reliability and surgeon experience on navigation performance.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- In vitro development of the Autonomous Colonoscope Robot System (ACRS) for fully automated colonoscope insertion.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- A UK single-center pilot experience using a novel robotic inchworm colonoscopy system.DEN open · 2026Article
- From Sensors to Care: How Robotic Skin Is Transforming Modern Healthcare-A Mini Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Advancing Colorectal Cancer Diagnostics from Barium Enema to AI-Assisted Colonoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Hypomethylation induced overexpression of PLOD3 facilitates colorectal cancer progression through TM9SF4-mediated autophagy.Cell death & disease · 2025Article
- Design and preliminary evaluation of a track-based robotic colonoscope with a shape-adaptable tip for propulsion.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2025Article
- Design and evaluation of new user control devices for improved ergonomics in flexible robotic endoscopy.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2025Article
- A soft robotic "Add-on" for colonoscopy: increasing safety and comfort through force monitoring.npj Robotics · 2025Article
- The adult large bowel: describing environment morphology for effective biomedical device development.Progress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England) · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of a Mobile Health Application for Educating Outpatients about Bowel Preparation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
- Artificial intelligence and automation in endoscopy and surgery.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2023Review
- Compressive Sensing of Medical Images Based on HSV Color Space.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Burnout in healthcare - the Emperor's New Clothes.Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2023Review
- Self-supervised monocular depth estimation for high field of view colonoscopy cameras.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2023Article
- Robotic, self-propelled, self-steerable, and disposable colonoscopes: Reality or pipe dream? A state of the art review.World journal of gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Colonoscopy: Past, Present, and Future.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Flexible colonoscopy remains the prime mean of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and the gold standard of all population-based screening pathways around the world. Almost 60% of CRC deaths could be prevented with screening. However, colonoscopy attendance rates are affected by discomfort, fear of pain and embarrassment or loss of control during the procedure. Moreover, the emergence and global thread of new communicable diseases might seriously affect the functioning of contemporary centres performing gastrointestinal endoscopy. Innovative solutions are needed: artificial intelligence (AI) and physical robotics will drastically contribute for the future of the healthcare services. The translation of robotic technologies from traditional surgery to minimally invasive endoscopic interventions is an emerging field, mainly challenged by the tough requirements for miniaturization. Pioneering approaches for robotic colonoscopy have been reported in the nineties, with the appearance of inchworm-like devices. Since then, robotic colonoscopes with assistive functionalities have become commercially available. Research prototypes promise enhanced accessibility and flexibility for future therapeutic interventions, even via autonomous or robotic-assisted agents, such as robotic capsules. Furthermore, the pairing of such endoscopic systems with AI-enabled image analysis and recognition methods promises enhanced diagnostic yield. By assembling a multidisciplinary team of engineers and endoscopists, the paper aims to provide a contemporary and highly-pictorial critical review for robotic colonoscopes, hence providing clinicians and researchers with a glimpse of the major changes and challenges that lie ahead.
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.