Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32803460›Full record

Observational studyDigestive diseases and sciences2021

Adoption of Multi-society Guidelines Facilitates Value-Based Reduction in Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy Volume During COVID-19 Pandemic.

Alexander Hua Xiao, Stephen Y Chang, Christian G Stevoff, Srinadh Komanduri, John E Pandolfino, Rajesh N Keswani

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Impact of Retroactive Application of Updated Surveillance Guidelines on Endoscopy Center Capacity at a Large VA Health Care System.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Colorectal cancer screening in the COVID-19 era.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alexander Hua XiaoNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Stephen Y ChangNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Christian G StevoffNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Srinadh KomanduriNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
John E PandolfinoNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Rajesh N KeswaniNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA. raj-keswani@northwestern.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9196-2138
Northwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 has caused a backlog of endoscopic procedures; colonoscopy must now be prioritized to those who would benefit most. We determined the proportion of screening and surveillance colonoscopies appropriate for rescheduling to a future year through strict adoption of US Multi-Society Task Force (USMSTF) guidelines.

methodsWe conducted a single-center observational study of patients scheduled for "open-access colonoscopy"-ordered by a primary care provider without being seen in gastroenterology clinic-over a 6-week period during the COVID-19 pandemic. Each chart was reviewed to appropriately assign a surveillance year per USMSTF guidelines including demographics, colonoscopy history and family history. When guidelines recommended a range of colonoscopy intervals, both a "conservative" and "liberal" guideline adherence were assessed.

resultsWe delayed 769 "open-access" screening or surveillance colonoscopies due to COVID-19. Between 14.8% (conservative) and 20.7% (liberal), colonoscopies were appropriate for rescheduling to a future year. Conversely, 415 (54.0%) patients were overdue for colonoscopy. Family history of CRC was associated with being scheduled too early for both screening (OR 3.9; CI 1.9-8.2) and surveillance colonoscopy (OR 2.6, CI 1.0-6.5). The most common reasons a colonoscopy was inappropriately scheduled this year were failure to use new surveillance colonoscopy intervals (28.9%), incorrectly applied family history guidelines (27.2%) and recommending early surveillance colonoscopy after recent normal colonoscopy (19.3%).

conclusionUp to one-fifth of patients scheduled for "open-access" colonoscopy can be rescheduled into a future year based on USMSTF guidelines. Rigorously applying guidelines could judiciously allocate colonoscopy resources as we recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesPopulation SurveillanceAdultAdvisory CommitteesAgedColonic PolypsColonoscopyCOVID-19Early Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPractice Guidelines as TopicUnited StatesColonoscopy overuseCOVID-19Surveillance colonoscopy

Identifiers

PMID32803460
PMCPMC7429116
OpenAlexW3049632701

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.