Trial reportEndoscopy2024
A computer-aided detection system in the everyday setting of diagnostic, screening, and surveillance colonoscopy: an international, randomized trial.
Trial report in Endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The role of artificial intelligence in adenoma detection during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials-Artificial intelligence and adenoma detection.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative Performance of Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Aided Detection Systems for Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Computer-Assisted Colonoscopy in High-Adenoma Detection Rate Settings in a High-Risk Population: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- The Role of Computational Models in the Detection of Colorectal Carcinoma and Precancerous Lesions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Colonoscopy for Colorectal Lesion Detection: Current Evidence, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence assisted colorectal lesion detection in private practices a randomized controlled study.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of Combination of a Mucosal Exposure Device and Computer-Aided Detection in Diagnostic, Screening, and Surveillance Colonoscopy: An International, Multicenter Study.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Computer-aided polyp detection and characterisation systems to support colonoscopy: a systematic review with results stratified by each individual artificial intelligence system.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- Clinical Evaluation of PolyDeep, A Computer-Aided Detection System: A Multicenter Randomized Tandem Colonoscopy Trial.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- PolyDeep Advance 1: Clinical Validation of a Computer-Aided Detection System for Colorectal Polyp Detection with a Second Observer Design.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComputer-aided detection (CADe) has been developed to improve detection during colonoscopy. After initial reports of high efficacy, there has been an increasing recognition of variability in the effectiveness of CADe systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate a CADe system in a varied colonoscopy population.
methodsA multicenter, randomized trial was conducted at seven hospitals (both university and non-university) in Europe and Canada. Participants referred for diagnostic, non-immunochemical fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) screening, or surveillance colonoscopy were randomized (1:1) to undergo CADe-assisted or conventional colonoscopy by experienced endoscopists. Participants with insufficient bowel preparation were excluded from the analysis. The primary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR). Secondary outcomes included adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) and sessile serrated lesions (SSLs) per colonoscopy.
results581 participants were enrolled, of whom 497 were included in the final analysis: 250 in the CADe arm and 247 in the conventional colonoscopy arm. The indication was surveillance in 202/497 colonoscopies (40.6 %), diagnostic in 199/497 (40.0 %), and non-iFOBT screening in 96/497 (19.3 %). Overall, ADR (38.4 % vs. 37.7 %;
conclusionsIn this study conducted by experienced endoscopists, CADe did not result in a statistically significant increase in ADR. However, the ADR of our control group substantially surpassed our sample size assumptions, increasing the risk of an underpowered trial.
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.