ReviewTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2023
The impact of COVID-19 on endoscopy and cancer screening: a focus on access and equity.
Review in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06200961 (Use of Sedation-Free Transnasal Endoscopy to Improve Access and Lower Costs of Endoscopic Evaluations in a Bariatric Medical and Surgical Program), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Use of Sedation-Free Transnasal Endoscopy to Improve Access and Lower Costs of Endoscopic Evaluations in a Bariatric Medical and Surgical Program
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adherence to Follow-Up Colonoscopy After a Positive Stool-Based Test in Patients Aged 45-49 Years: Real-World Differences Between Multitarget Stool DNA Testing and Fecal Immunochemical or Fecal Occult Blood Testing.Gastro hep advances · 2025Article
- Survival Difference of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Among Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups: A SEER Database Study.Hawai'i journal of health & social welfare · 2024Article
- Colonoscopy Outreach for Rural Communities (CORC): A study protocol of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of a patient navigation program to improve colonoscopy completion for colorectal cancer screening.Contemporary clinical trials · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The SARS-CoV2 pandemic has had a profound and lasting impact on healthcare delivery. Gastrointestinal endoscopy services were limited during the early phases of the pandemic, which has resulted in ongoing procedural backlog. Procedural delays have had continuing effects including delayed colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnoses and exacerbation of existing disparities in the CRC-screening and treatment pathways. In this review, we outline these effects as well as the variety of strategies that have been proposed to eliminate this backlog, including increased endoscopy hours, re-triaging of referrals, and alternative CRC-screening strategies.
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.