ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Knowledge, perceptions and behaviours of endoscopists towards the use of artificial intelligence-aided colonoscopy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endoscopists' attitudes toward and experiences with artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: a 3-year follow-up survey after the implementation of GI Genius.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in inflammatory bowel disease: bridging innovation, implementation and impact.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026Review
- Asia-Pacific consensus on the use of artificial intelligence in colorectal cancer screening and surveillance.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in colonoscopy: Enhancing quality indicators for optimal patient outcomes.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- The evolution of single-use duodenoscope utilization at a large-volume endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography tertiary care center.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- Provider Attitudes and Perceptions on Using Artificial Intelligence in Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Gastro hep advances · 2025Review
- The imitation game: a review of the use of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy, and endoscopists' perceptions thereof.Annals of coloproctology · 2023Review
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
backgroundRecent developments in artificial intelligence (AI) systems have enabled advancements in endoscopy. Deep learning systems, using convolutional neural networks, have allowed for real-time AI-aided detection of polyps with higher sensitivity than the average endoscopist. However, not all endoscopists welcome the advent of AI systems.
methodsWe conducted a survey on the knowledge of AI, perceptions of AI in medicine, and behaviours regarding use of AI-aided colonoscopy, in a single centre 2 months after the implementation of Medtronic's GI Genius in colonoscopy. We obtained a response rate of 66.7% (16/24) amongst consultant-grade endoscopists. Fisher's exact test was used to calculate the significance of correlations.
resultsKnowledge of AI varied widely amongst endoscopists. Most endoscopists were optimistic about AI's capabilities in performing objective administrative and clinical tasks, but reserved about AI providing personalised, empathetic care. 68.8% (n = 11) of endoscopists agreed or strongly agreed that GI Genius should be used as an adjunct in colonoscopy. In analysing the 31.3% (n = 5) of endoscopists who disagreed or were ambivalent about its use, there was no significant correlation with their knowledge or perceptions of AI, but a significant number did not enjoy using the programme (p-value = 0.0128) and did not think it improved the quality of colonoscopy (p-value = 0.033).
conclusionsAcceptance of AI-aided colonoscopy systems is more related to the endoscopist's experience with using the programme, rather than general knowledge or perceptions towards AI. Uptake of such systems will rely greatly on how the device is delivered to the end user.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37670191What 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.