ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2023
Interobserver Variation of Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-assisted assessment of bowel preparation from patient-generated images for pre-procedure triage.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Interobserver variability in colonoscopy quality assessment: a retrospective standardized multicenter video-based study.Archive of clinical cases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUD/
aimsSeveral bowel preparation scales have been developed, but they are variably validated to guide clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess the interobserver reliability between internal and external endoscopists using the Harefield Cleaning Scale (HCS).
methodsData was collected from a study evaluating the efficacy of oral sulfate tablets in patients undergoing colonoscopy. The assessments of bowel cleansing were carried out by four internal endoscopists at the time of the procedure, and colonoscopy video recordings were reviewed independently by three external endoscopists. Interobserver reliability was quantified using Cohen's Kappa coefficient, and scores and grades of each segment were compared between internal and external endoscopist groups.
resultsAmong 83 colonoscopy videos, interobserver reliability yielded a fair agreement between internal and external endoscopists, with a Cohen's Kappa coefficient of 0.39 (95% CI 0.08-0.70). Successful overall preparation rates (100% vs 98.8%) and high-quality preparation rates (88% vs 94%) were excellent and comparable between the two groups. In contrast, one case of unsuccessful cleansing (grade C) was documented, only in the external group. In addition, the interobserver reliability between internal and external endoscopists comparing each segmental score yielded a slight agreement in the descending colon (0.11, 95% CI - 0.02 to 0.23) and sigmoid colon (0.04, 95% CI - 0.18 to 0.26). DISCUSSION: Interobserver reliability between internal and external endoscopists using the HCS was fair. However, the HCS may be limited as a reliable scale for assessing bowel preparation quality in the left colon, where liquid is mainly retained in the left lateral position.
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.