ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Comparative performance and external validation of three different scores in predicting inadequate bowel preparation among Greek inpatients undergoing colonoscopy.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk prediction models for inadequate bowel preparation before colonoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2026Pooled it
- Development and validation of a gut motility based model for predicting bowel preparation quality.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Derivation and validation of a prediction model for inadequate bowel preparation in Chinese outpatients.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Restrictive diets are unnecessary for colonoscopy: Non-inferiority randomized trial.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 10 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Predictive scores aim to predict bowel preparation adequacy among hospitalized patients undergoing colonoscopy. We evaluated the comparative efficacy of these scores in predicting inadequate bowel cleansing in a cohort of Greek inpatients. Methods: We performed a Results: Overall, 261 patients-121 (46.4%) female, 100 (38.3%) bedridden, mean age 70.7±15.4 years-were included in the analysis. Model B showed the highest performance (Harrell's C-index: AUC 77.2% vs. 72.6% and 57.5%, compared to models A and C, respectively). It also achieved higher performance for the subgroup of mobilized inpatients (Harrell's C-index: AUC 72.21% vs. 64.97% and 59.66%, compared to models A and C, respectively). Model B also performed better in predicting patients with incomplete colonoscopy due to inadequate bowel preparation (Harrell's C-index: AUC 74.23% vs. 69.07% and 52.76%, compared to models A and C, respectively). Conclusions: Predictive model B outperforms its comparators in the prediction of inpatients with inadequate bowel preparation. This model is particularly advantageous when used to evaluate mobilized inpatients.
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.