ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2022
Post-polypectomy follow-up recommendations by practicing academic gastroenterologists-does number of years in practice matter?
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Post-polypectomy surveillance documentation and guideline concordance: A retrospective clinical audit of physician documentation at a tertiary Saudi hospital.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- Colonoscopy quality measures and adherence to follow-up guidelines among endoscopists participating in a U.S. endoscopy registry.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimColorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most deadly and fourth most common cancer worldwide. Early detection, resection, and appropriate surveillance of precursor polyps result in better outcomes. Colonoscopy is a safe, accurate, and effective tool for surveillance and follow-up of premalignant polyps. Recommended surveillance intervals are based on polyp, procedural, and patient-related factors. The United States Multi-Society Task Force (MSTF) on CRC publishes guidelines with periodic updates on surveillance. We sought to evaluate adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines by academic gastroenterologists at a high-volume center.
methodsOne-year retrospective study evaluating compliance with post-polypectomy recommendations after average risk adult screening colonoscopies. Data was collected on number and size of polyps, quality of bowel prep, initial follow-up recommendations, polyp pathology, and follow-up recommendations. Correlation with the 2012 MSTF guidelines was also evaluated. Endoscopist experience was categorized as greater or less than 10 years of practice experience. Binomial regression was used to model the association between the providers' years of experience (<10 vs. >10) and the likelihood of agreement between initial assessment and post-pathology assessment.
resultsThere was a greater than 85% adherence to post-polypectomy surveillance guidelines, independent of endoscopist experience.
conclusionThere is a high level of adherence to post-polypectomy guidelines by practicing academic gastroenterologists independent of post-fellowship clinical experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35260934What 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.