ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Colon Capsule Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Colon Polyps: Who Needs a Colonoscopy?
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The presence and relative abundance of salivary Fusobacterium nucleatum are not associated with colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Re-investigation rate following colon capsule endoscopy stratified by faecal haemoglobin concentration in a screening population.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Best Approach for Incomplete Colonoscopy: Colon Capsule Endoscopy or Repeat Conventional Colonoscopy?GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Optimization of colorectal cancer screening strategies: New insights.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Is Panenteric PillcamDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Clinical utility of colon capsule endoscopy: a moving target?Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Low Colon Capsule Endoscopy (CCE) False Negative Rate for Polyps Excluding Reader Error.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colon screening programs have reduced colon cancer mortality. Population screening should be minimally invasive, safe, acceptably sensitive, cost-effective, and scalable. The range of screening modalities include guaiac or immunochemical fecal occult blood testing and CT colonography and colonoscopy. A number of carefully controlled studies concur that second-generation capsule endoscopy has excellent sensitivity for polyp detection and a high negative predictive value. Colon capsules fulfill the screening expectation of safety, high sensitivity for polyp detection, and patient acceptance, and appear to straddle the divide between occult blood testing and colonoscopy. While meeting these criteria, there remains the challenges of scaling, capsule practitioner training, resource allocation, and implementing change of practice. Like CT colonography, capsule screening presents the clinician with a decision on the threshold for colonoscopy referral. Overall, colon capsules are an invaluable tool in polyp detection and colon screening and offer a filter that determines "who needs a colonoscopy?".
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.