ArticleJournal of gastroenterology2024
Prevalence of colonoscopy in Japan using a large-scale health claims data compared to esophagogastroduodenoscopy.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePrevalence of colonoscopy (CS) is an important countermeasure against colorectal cancer (CRC). In this study, we used large-scale data for a comparison of CS with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in Japan.
methodsThis was a retrospective descriptive study. Commercially anonymized patient data were collected from various health insurance societies (JMDC, Inc. Tokyo, Japan) generated from the insurance registry, receipts (inpatient, outpatient, and prescription), and health checkup data. The data also included healthy subjects who had never been examined in a hospital. The data of 2,760,048 persons who were 50-75 years old during January 2012-December 2019 were extracted from the original data source. The annual rate, the prevalence rate (frequency of those undergoing at least one endoscopy during the period), and the percentage of repeaters (undergoing endoscopy at least twice during the period) of CS were calculated and compared to those of EGD.
resultsThe annual rates in 2012/2015/2019 were 3.4%/4.5%/5.3% for CS, respectively, and increased gradually from 2012 to 2019. Those rates were 7.0%/7.9%/7.4% for EGD, respectively, and did not increase. The prevalence rates of CS and EGD were 25.3% and 36.2%, respectively, among the 137,246 participants over 8 years. The prevalence rates of individuals in their 50 s/60 s/70 s were 23.0%/25.9%/31.4% for CS and 33.0%/37.6%/40.7% for EGD, respectively. The proportions of males/females were 27.9%/20.7% for CS, and 36.4%/35.8% for EGD, respectively. The repeat rates of CS and EGD were 40.3% and 44.8%, respectively, over 8 years.
conclusionsUsing large-scale data, we determined the status of CS and EGD in Japan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38466371What 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.