ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2021
Simplifying Measurement of Adenoma Detection Rates for Colonoscopy.
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. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Improving Colonoscopy Quality for Colorectal Cancer Screening in the National VA Healthcare System
Computer Assisted Detection of Neoplasia During Colonoscopy Evaluation (CADeNCE)
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality indicators for colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Guideline
- Improving colonoscopy quality in the national VA healthcare system.Contemporary clinical trials · 2025Article
- Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Development and Validation of an Automated, Real-time Adenoma Detection Rate and Colonoscopy Quality Metrics Calculator.Techniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Article
- Leveraging electronic medical record functionality to capture adenoma detection rate.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Factors Affecting Adenoma Risk Level in Patients with Intestinal Polyp and Association Analysis.Journal of healthcare engineering · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdenoma detection rate (ADR) is the colonoscopy quality metric with the strongest association to interval or "missed" cancer. Accurate measurement of ADR can be laborious and costly.
aimsOur aim was to determine if administrative procedure codes for colonoscopy and text searches of pathology results for adenoma mentions could estimate ADR.
methodsWe identified US Veterans with a colonoscopy using Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes between January 2013 and December 2016 at ten Veterans Affairs sites. We applied simple text searches using Microsoft SQL Server full-text searches to query all pathology notes for "adenoma(s)" or "adenomatous" text mentions to calculate ADRs. To validate our identification of colonoscopy procedures, endoscopists of record, and adenoma detection from the electronic health record, we manually reviewed a random sample of 2000 procedure and pathology notes from the 10 sites.
resultsStructured data fields were accurate in identification of colonoscopies being performed (PPV = 0.99; 95% CI 0.99-1.00) and identifying the endoscopist of record (PPV of 0.95; 95% CI 0.94-0.96) for ADR measurement. Simple text searches of pathology notes for adenoma mentions had excellent performance statistics as follows: sensitivity 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00), specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.95), NPV 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00), and PPV 0.93 (0.91-0.94) for measurement of ADR. There was no clinically significant difference in the estimates of overall ADR vs. screening ADR (p > 0.05).
conclusionsMeasuring ADR using administrative codes and text searches from pathology results is an efficient method to broadly survey colonoscopy quality.
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.