ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Time-of-day variation in the diagnostic quality of screening colonoscopies: a registry-based study.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Risks and benefits of artificial intelligence in luminal endoscopy].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Assessing the potential of artificial intelligence to enhance colonoscopy adenoma detection in clinical practice: a prospective observational trial.Clinical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Clinical Validation Benchmark Dataset and Expert Performance Baseline for Colorectal Polyp Localization Methods.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- The Role of an Artificial Intelligence Method of Improving the Diagnosis of Neoplasms by Colonoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Influence of Artificial Intelligence on the Adenoma Detection Rate throughout the Day.Digestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnostic quality of screening colonoscopies has been found to differ between morning and afternoon. Specifically, the adenoma detection rate (ADR) is higher in the morning. Our aim was to assess if time-of-day dependent differences in colonoscopy quality exist in a Danish screening setting. Following national screening guidelines, an individual will be exempt from screening invitations for 8 years if the colonoscopy is without pathology. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to identify factors systematically affecting the detection of lesions.
methodsThis was a single-center study of screening colonoscopies performed between 2014 and 2018. Records were retrieved from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database and coupled with local data. The ADR and the cecal intubation rate were compared between morning (8-12 a.m.) and afternoon (12-4 p.m.) colonoscopies. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed.
resultsA total of 3659 screening colonoscopies were included. The ADR was 51% in the morning and 58% in the afternoon. Multivariate analysis found this statistically significant, with the "afternoon vs. morning" odds ratio for adenoma detection being 1.4 (95% confidence interval 1.17-1.68; P<0.001). The cecal intubation rate was 95.6% in the morning and 94.7%, a non-significant difference.
conclusionsThe ADR of screening colonoscopies was higher in the afternoon. Our study highlights the need for local/regional evaluation of factors affecting colonoscopy quality to address such issues. A clean colonoscopy exempts the patient from subsequent screening invitations for 8 years. Therefore, any observed systematic differences in quality must be addressed and eliminated.
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.