Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34988171›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021

Artificial intelligence-assisted detection and classification of colorectal polyps under colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aling Wang, Jiahao Mo, Cailing Zhong, Shaohua Wu, Sufen Wei, Binqi Tu, Chang Liu, Daman Chen, Qing Xu, Mengyi Cai and 6 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Aling Wang *The Second Clinical Medical School, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Jiahao Mo *The Second Clinical Medical School, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Cailing Zhong *Department of Gastroenterology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Shaohua WuThe Second Clinical Medical School, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Sufen WeiDepartment of Gastroenterology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Binqi TuThe Second Clinical Medical School, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Chang LiuThe Second Clinical Medical School, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Daman ChenGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Qing XuGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Mengyi CaiGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Zhuoyao LiGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Wenting XieGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Miao XieGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Motohiko KatoDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Xujie XiDepartment of Gastroenterology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Beiping ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNKeio University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) is used to solve the problem of missed diagnosis of polyps in colonoscopy, which has been proved to improve the detection rate of adenomas. The aim of this review was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of AI-assisted detection and classification of polyps in colonoscopy.

methodsThe literature search was undertaken on 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library). The inclusion criteria were as follows: studies reporting AI-assisted detection and classification of polyps; studies containing patients, images, or videos receiving AI-assisted diagnosis; studies which included AI-assisted diagnosis and reported classification based on histopathology; and studies providing accurate diagnostic data. Non-English language studies, case-reports, reviews, meeting abstracts and so on were excluded. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 scale was used to evaluate the quality of literature and the Stata 13.0 software was used to perform meta-analysis.

resultsTwenty-six articles were included with all of medium quality. Meta-analysis showed none of literature had any obvious publication bias. The application of AI in detection of colorectal polyps achieved a sensitivity of 0.95 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-0.98] and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.79-0.82). In the AI-assisted classification, the sensitivity was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.88-0.95) with a specificity of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71-0.89) and an AUC of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92-0.96). For the classification of diminutive polyps, the AI-assisted technique yielded a sensitivity of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94-0.97), a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.74-0.95), and an AUC of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98). For AI-assisted classification under magnifying endoscopy, the sensitivity was 0.954 (95% CI: 0.92-0.96) with a specificity of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.80-0.99) and an AUC of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98). DISCUSSION: The AI-assisted technique demonstrates impressive accuracy for the detection and characterization of colorectal polyps and can be expected to be a novel auxiliary diagnosis method. Our study has inevitable limitations including heterogeneity due to different AI systems and the inability to further analyze the specificity and sensitivity of AI for different types of endoscopes.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence (AI)colonoscopycolorectal polypsmeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID34988171
PMCPMC8667153
OpenAlexW3216660852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.