ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2022
A True Positive and a False Negative? The Dilemma of Negative Colonoscopy After a Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating false-positive outcomes after stool-based colorectal cancer screening tests: a scoping review.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Interval Advanced Adenomas and Neoplasia in Patients with Negative Colonoscopy Following Positive Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Test.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Review
- Utility of Stool-Based Tests for Colorectal Cancer Detection: A Comprehensive Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Adenoma location, size, and morphology are risk factors for FOBT false-negative results in inpatients with advanced colorectal adenoma.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- [Colonoscopic Findings in Patients with a Positive Fecal Occult Blood Test: A Descriptive Study].Acta gastroenterologica LatinoamericanaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMany colonoscopies following a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) will not identify a probable cause for fecal blood, and missed neoplasia is a concern. The study determined whether the absence of neoplasia at a FIT positive diagnostic colonoscopy was due to a missed lesion and whether the initial FIT hemoglobin (f-Hb) concentration could predict missed lesions.
methodsThis was a retrospective audit of patients who had undergone diagnostic colonoscopy after FIT screening (2 sample ≥ 20 µg Hb/g feces). Probable bleeding lesions including cancer, advanced adenoma, colitis, and angiodysplasia were considered a "positive colonoscopy outcome." For those with a negative outcome, findings at the subsequent colonoscopy were assessed.
resultsThere were 1087 good quality colonoscopies within 12 months of a positive FIT. In total, 171 (15.7%) patients had a positive outcome at the diagnostic colonoscopy. Subsequent colonoscopies of negative outcome cases (n = 418, median of 3.1y later) were reviewed; of these, there were 57 (13.6%) cases with a positive outcome. This included CRC in 0.5% (n = 2) and advanced adenoma in 11.7% (n = 49). High f-Hb and having both FIT samples ≥ 20 µg/g feces were associated with a positive outcome at the original diagnostic colonoscopy (p < 0.05). However, f-Hb was not predictive for a positive outcome at the subsequent colonoscopy by either maximum f-Hb (p = 0.768), total f-Hb (p = 0.459), or both FIT samples ≥ 20 µg/g (p = 0.091).
conclusionA small proportion of "false" positive FIT results had cancer or advanced adenoma found at the subsequent colonoscopy. A missed lesion could not be predicted by the initial FIT f-Hb.
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.