Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34933279›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2022

Correlation between Surrogate Quality Indicators for Adenoma Detection Rate and Adenoma Miss Rate in Qualified Colonoscopy, CORE Study: KASID Multicenter Study.

Jae Hee Han, Hyun Gun Kim, Eu Mi Ahn, Suyeon Park, Seong Ran Jeon, Jae Myung Cha, Min Seob Kwak, Yunho Jung, Jeong Eun Shin, Hyun Deok Shin and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Quality indicators for colonoscopy.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024
    Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Jae Hee HanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1402-7573
Hyun Gun KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-7545-4638
Eu Mi AhnDepartment of Digestive Disease Center, Soonchunhyang University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4168-726X
Suyeon ParkDepartment of Data Innovation, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6391-557X
Seong Ran JeonDepartment of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6970-9737
Jae Myung ChaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9403-230X
Min Seob KwakDepartment of Internal Medicine, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8988-7423
Yunho JungDepartment of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2299-9911
Jeong Eun ShinDepartment of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5706-3967
Hyun Deok ShinDepartment of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-2016-4649
Young-Seok ChoDepartment of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1537-3427
Soonchunhyang University · KRDankook University · KRKyung Hee University · KRCatholic University of Korea · KRSoonchunhyang University Hospital Seoul · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: The adenoma detection rate (ADR) does not reflect the complete detection of every adenoma during colonoscopy; thus, many surrogate indicators have been suggested. This study investigated whether the ADR and surrogate quality indicators reflect the adenoma miss rate (AMR) when performing qualified colonoscopy. Methods: We performed a prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional study of asymptomatic examinees aged 50 to 75 years who underwent back-to-back screening colonoscopies by eight endoscopists. The ADR and surrogate quality indicators, including polyp detection rate, total number of adenomas per colonoscopy, additional adenomas found after the first adenoma per colonoscopy (ADR-Plus), and total number of adenomas per positive participant, were calculated for the prediction of AMR. Results: A total of 371 back-to-back colonoscopies were performed. There was a significant difference in ADRs (range, 44% to 75.4%; p=0.024), polyp detection rates (range, 56% to 86.9%; p=0.008) and adenomas per positive participants (range, 1.19 to 2.30; p=0.038), and a tendency of a difference in adenomas per colonoscopy (range, 0.62 to 1.31; p=0.051) and ADR-Plus (range, 0.13 to 0.70; p=0.054) among the endoscopists. The overall AMR was 20.1%, and AMRs were not different (range, 13.9 to 28.6; p>0.05) among the endoscopists. No quality indicators were significantly correlated with AMR. The number of adenomas found during the first colonoscopy was an independent factor for increased AMR (odds ratio, 1.79; p<0.001). Conclusions: The colonoscopy quality indicators were significantly different among high-ADR endoscopists, and none of the quality indicators reflected the AMR of good quality colonoscopy performances. The only factor influencing AMR was the number of adenomas detected during colonoscopy.

Indexed as

AdenomaColorectal NeoplasmsPolypsColonoscopyCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerHumansProspective StudiesAdenomaColonoscopyMiss rateQuality indicator

Identifiers

PMID34933279
PMCPMC9474487
OpenAlexW4200574222

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.