ArticleIntestinal research2024
Adequacy of sigmoidoscopy as compared to colonoscopy for assessment of disease activity in patients of ulcerative colitis: a prospective study.
Article in Intestinal research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Reshaping study design for faster extrapolation-based drug approval in pediatric inflammatory bowel diseases: An ESPGHAN-NASPGHAN position paper.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Sigmoidoscopy is sufficient to assess endoscopic response to therapy in pediatric ulcerative colitis: A cohort study.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2026Article
- Comments on "Adequacy of sigmoidoscopy as compared to colonoscopy for assessment of disease activity in patients of ulcerative colitis: a prospective study".Intestinal research · 2025Article
- Response: Comments on "Adequacy of sigmoidoscopy as compared to colonoscopy for assessment of disease activity in patients of ulcerative colitis: a prospective study".Intestinal research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsPatients of ulcerative colitis (UC) on follow-up are routinely evaluated by sigmoidoscopy. There is no prospective literature to support this practice. We assessed agreement between sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy prospectively in patients with disease extent beyond the sigmoid colon.
methodsWe conducted a prospective observational study at a tertiary care institute for agreement between sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. We assessed endoscopic activity using the Mayo Endoscopic Score (MES) and Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity (UCEIS) and histological activity using the Nancy Index (NI), Robarts Histopathology Index (RHI), and Simplified Geboes Score (SGS).
resultsSigmoidoscopy showed a strong agreement with colonoscopy for MES and UCEIS with a kappa (κ) of 0.96 and 0.94 respectively. The misclassification rate for MES and UCEIS was 3% and 5% respectively. Sigmoidoscopy showed perfect agreement (κ = 1.00) with colonoscopy for assessment of the presence of endoscopic activity in the colon using MES ≥ 1 as activity criteria and strong agreement (κ = 0.93) using MES > 1 as activity criteria. Sigmoidoscopy showed strong agreement with colonoscopy for assessment of the presence of endoscopic activity using UCEIS (κ = 0.92). Strong agreement was observed between sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy using NI (κ = 0.86), RHI (κ = 1.00), and SGS (κ = 0.92) for the detection of histological activity. The misclassification rate for the detection of histological activity was 2%, 0%, and 1% for NI, RHI, and SGS respectively.
conclusionsSigmoidoscopy showed strong agreement with colonoscopy for endoscopic and histologic disease activity. Sigmoidoscopy is adequate for assessment of disease activity in patients with UC during follow-up evaluation.
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.