Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32894441›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2021

Patient, Physician, and Procedure Characteristics Are Independently Predictive of Polyp Detection Rates in Clinical Practice.

Nicole G Jawitz, Ziad F Gellad, Li Lin, Richard K Wood, David A Leiman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicole G JawitzDivision of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, 200 Morris Street, Suite 6524, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Ziad F GelladDivision of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, 200 Morris Street, Suite 6524, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Li LinDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Durham, NC, USA.
Richard K WoodDivision of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, 200 Morris Street, Suite 6524, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
David A LeimanDivision of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, 200 Morris Street, Suite 6524, Durham, NC, 27701, USA. david.leiman@duke.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6350-3906
Duke University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVariability in colon polyp detection impacts patient outcomes. However, the relative influence of physician, patient, and procedure-specific factors on polyp detection is unclear. Therefore, determining how these factors contribute to adenoma and sessile serrated polyp (SSP) detection is important to contextualize measures of colonoscopy quality such as adenoma detection rate and patient outcomes.

aimsTo determine the relative contribution of physician, patient, and procedure-specific factors in total polyp, adenoma, and SSP detection rates.

methodsWe performed a retrospective study of patients undergoing screening colonoscopy and used a two-level generalized linear mixed regression model to identify factors associated with polyp detection.

results7799 average risk screening colonoscopies were performed between July 2016 and October 2017. The patient factor most strongly associated with increased risk of adenoma and sessile serrated polyp detection was white race (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.39 and OR 3.17, 95% CI 2.34-4.30, respectively). Adenomatous (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.04-3.57) and sessile serrated polyps (OR 5.56, 95% CI 1.37-20.0) were more likely to be found during procedures performed with anesthesia care as compared to those with moderate sedation. Physician with a luminal gastrointestinal focus had increased odds of adenoma detection (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.02-2.50).

conclusionsIn a multi-level model accounting for clustering effects, we identified patient, provider and procedural factors independently influence adenoma and sessile serrated polyp detection. Our findings suggest that to compare polyp detection rates between endoscopists, even at the same institution, risk adjustment by characteristics of the patient population and practice is necessary.

Indexed as

PhysiciansAdenomaColonic NeoplasmsColonic PolypsColonoscopyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOdds RatioAdenoma detection rateColonoscopy qualityScreening colonoscopySessile serrated polyps

Identifiers

PMID32894441
OpenAlexW3083913861

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.