Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39882222›Full record

ArticleJournal of the anus, rectum and colon2025

Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence: Computer-aided Detection of Colorectal Polyps.

Yuya Hiratsuka, Takashi Hisabe, Kensei Ohtsu, Tatsuhisa Yasaka, Kazuhiro Takeda, Masaki Miyaoka, Yoichiro Ono, Takao Kanemitsu, Kentaro Imamura, Teruyuki Takeda and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the anus, rectum and colon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Yuya HiratsukaDepartment of Endoscopy, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Takashi HisabeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Kensei OhtsuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Tatsuhisa YasakaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Kazuhiro TakedaDepartment of Endoscopy, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Masaki MiyaokaDepartment of Endoscopy, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Yoichiro OnoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Takao KanemitsuDepartment of Endoscopy, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Kentaro ImamuraDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Teruyuki TakedaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Satoshi NimuraDepartment of Pathology, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.
Kenshi YaoDepartment of Endoscopy, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Colonoscopy is the gold standard for screening cancer and precancerous lesions in the large intestine. Recently, remarkable advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have led to the development of various computer-aided detection (CADe) systems for colonoscopy. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of AI for colonoscopy using CAD-EYE Methods: This randomized, open-label, single-center, tandem study was conducted at Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital from February 2022 to November 2022. Patients were randomly assigned to the CADe or non-CADe group. Immediately after the completion of the first endoscopy by an endoscopist, a new endoscopist was assigned to perform the second endoscopy. As a result, different endoscopists performed the examinations in a tandem fashion. A missed lesion was defined as a newly detected colorectal polyp by the second endoscopy. Finally, the AMR was compared between the two groups. Results: The study population comprised 48 patients in the CADe group and 46 patients in the non-CADe group. The AMR was 17.4% in the CADe group and 30.3% in the non-CADe group. Therefore, the AMR in the CADe group was statistically significantly lower than that in the non-CADe group (P=0.009). Conclusions: The application of CAD-EYE

Indexed as

adenoma detection rateadenoma miss rateartificial intelligencecomputer-aided detection

Identifiers

PMID39882222
PMCPMC11772790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.