ArticleBMC gastroenterology2021
Patient experience with NER1006 as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a prospective, multicenter US survey.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05436054 (A Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare Efficacy and Tolerability of Plenvu® and Picoprep® as Cleansing Agents Before Colonoscopy), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
A Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare Efficacy and Tolerability of Plenvu® and Picoprep® as Cleansing Agents Before Colonoscopy
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent technological advances in video capsule endoscopy: a comprehensive review.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Comparison of the Effectiveness of Three Different Combinations for Colonoscopy Preparation: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Bowel preparation for small bowel capsule endoscopy: standard regimen with 2 L polyethylene glycol versus 1 L polyethylene glycol plus ascorbate.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Bowel cleansing effectiveness and safety of 1L PEG + Asc in the real-world setting: Observational, retrospective, multicenter study of over 13000 patients.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- The Effectiveness and Tolerability of a Very Low-Volume Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy Compared to Low and High-Volume Polyethylene Glycol-Solutions in the Real-Life Setting.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Patient experience with NER1006 as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy: a prospective, multicenter US survey.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Toward high-quality bowel preparation in Italy: insights from a nationwide cross-sectional survey of endoscopists.Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNER1006 (Plenvu
methodsAdults were recruited from 444 US community gastrointestinal practices and provided a kit number for enrollment into an online survey to be completed within 2 weeks. Survey questions evaluated colonoscopy history and prior bowel preparation(s) prescribed, patient experience during NER1006 administration, and patient satisfaction with the bowel preparation process. A 9-point predefined grading scale was used to evaluate ease of NER1006 preparation and consumption (range, 1 "very difficult" to 9 "very easy"); the perceived importance of volume requirement and clear liquid options (range, 1 "not important at all" to 9 "very important"); and patient satisfaction (range, 1 "not satisfied at all" to 9 "very satisfied").
results1630 patients were enrolled, 1606 underwent colonoscopy, and 1598 completed the survey between September 15, 2018 and February 28, 2019. Among 1606 patients who had a colonoscopy, 62.5% were female, and the mean patient age was 54.4 years (range 18-89 years). Most patients (74.7%) did not report a family history of colon cancer, 62.6% had undergone prior colonoscopy, and 64.8% were undergoing colonoscopy for routine colorectal cancer screening. A majority (76.1%) of patients who completed the survey reported that NER1006 was very easy to prepare and take, and 89.9% were very or moderately satisfied with NER1006 overall. Most (97.6%) patients reported consuming all or most of the bowel preparation. Among 1005 patients with previous bowel preparation use, 84.7% indicated that their experience with NER1006 was much better or better (65.3%) or about the same (19.4%) compared with previously used bowel preparations, while only 15.3% rated NER1006 as worse or much worse.
conclusionsIn this first real-world, US multicenter survey, patient-reported experience with NER1006 as a bowel preparation for colonoscopy was favorable and adherence was high. The majority of patients were very or moderately satisfied with the overall experience and found it much better/better than previously used bowel preparations.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.