ReviewClinical endoscopy2022
Can Computed Tomography Colonography Replace Optical Colonoscopy in Detecting Colorectal Lesions?: State of the Art.
Review in Clinical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Influence of Mechanical Bowel Preparation on Volatile Organic Compounds for the Detection of Gastrointestinal Disease-A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic performance of photon-counting detector CT versus energy-integrating detector CT for colorectal polyp detection: a phantom study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- GFANet: Global Feature Attention Network for Polyp Segmentation.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Research advances in early screening for colorectal cancer (Review).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Advances in colorectal cancer screening and detection: a narrative review on biomarkers, imaging and preventive strategies.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2025Review
- DIVERT-Ca: unveiling the hidden link between acute diverticulitis and colorectal cancer risk-multicentre retrospective study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Article
- The Detection of Colorectal Cancer through Machine Learning-Based Breath Sensor Analysis.Diagnostics (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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Optical colonoscopy (OC) is widely accepted as the reference standard for the screening of colorectal polyps and cancers, and computed tomography colonography (CTC) is a valid alternative to OC. The purpose of this review was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of OC and CTC for colorectal lesions. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, and 18 articles were included. CTC has emerged in recent years as a potential screening examination with high accuracy for the detection of colorectal lesions. However, the clinical application of CTC as a screening technique is limited because it is highly dependent on the size of the lesions and has poor performance in detecting individual lesions <5 mm or flat lesions, which, although rarely, can have a malignant potential.
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.