ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2024
COLODETECT 1: comparative evaluation of endocuff with computer-aided detection versus computer-aided detection alone versus standard colonoscopy for enhancing adenoma detection rates during screening colonoscopy-a pilot study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05080088 (A Pilot Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
A Pilot Study: Retrospective Evaluation of 3 Colonic Adenoma Detection Strategies During a Colonoscopy: Endoscopy Cap Associated With the Artificial Intelligence GI GENIUS ™ System, the Artificial Intelligence GI GENIUS ™ Alone and Colonoscopy Alone
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence with mucosal exposure devices versus artificial intelligence alone in detection of colorectal adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Computer-aided detection with or without mucosal-exposure devices in colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Integration of Endocuff-Assisted and Computer-Aided Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Colonoscopy Quality and Strategies for Improvement.Gut and liver · 2026Review
- Combining techniques and technologies increases adenoma detection rates in colonoscopy: More is more.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
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
Background: Independent use of artificial intelligence with computer-aided detection (CADe) and Endocuff Vision (ECV) has demonstrated enhanced adenoma detection rates (ADRs). Objective: Our pilot study aimed to define the necessary participant number for future randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by comparing the ADR of combined CADe + ECV against CADe alone and standard colonoscopy. Design: This single-center pilot study retrospectively analyzed a prospectively maintained database, where patients underwent screening colonoscopies sequentially by standard method, CADe alone, and then CADe + ECV. Method: The allocation of the technique depended on the study period. Patients were randomly selected from the cohort to form three groups of 30 patients, with stratification based on factors influencing the ADR. The primary endpoint was the ADR. Results: From April to June 2021, 244 patients underwent screening colonoscopy. 198 were eligible, and after randomization, 90 patients were included across three groups (colonoscopy Conclusion: These findings underscore the synergic potential of combining CADe with ECV to enhance ADR and enable us to perform sample size calculations for future RCTs. Registration: Clinical Trials number: NCT05080088. Registration 06/06/2021.
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.