Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35719899›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2022

Lessons learned: Preventable misses and near-misses of endoscopic procedures.

Alla Turshudzhyan, Houman Rezaizadeh, Micheal Tadros

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Alla TurshudzhyanDepartment of Medicine, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06030, United States.
Houman RezaizadehDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06030, United States.
Micheal TadrosDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY 12208, United States. tadrosm1@amc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopy is a complex procedure that requires advanced training and a highly skilled practitioner. The advances in the field of endoscopy have made it an invaluable diagnostic tool, but the procedure remains provider dependent. The quality of endoscopy may vary from provider to provider and, as a result, is not perfect. Consequently, 11.3% of upper gastrointestinal neoplasms are missed on the initial upper endoscopy and 2.1%-5.9% of colorectal polyps or cancers are missed on colonoscopy. Pathology is overlooked if endoscopic exam is not done carefully, bypassing proper visualization of the scope's entry and exit points or, if exam is not taken to completion, not visualizing the most distal bowel segments. We hope to shed light on this issue, establish areas of weakness, and propose possible solutions and preventative measures.

Indexed as

Cancer screeningEGDendoscopyEsophagogastroduodenoscopyHigh-quality colonoscopyMissed lesions

Identifiers

PMID35719899
PMCPMC9157695

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.