Trial reportJAMA network open2025
Automatic Quality Control System and Adenoma Detection Rates During Routine Colonoscopy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04901130 (Impact of Real-time Automatic Quality Control System on Colorectal Adenoma Detection), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Impact of Real-time Automatic Quality Control System on Colorectal Adenoma Detection: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
7 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
- Artificial intelligence-based computer-aided detection systems for adenomas during colonoscopy: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- A prospective study evaluating an artificial intelligence-based system for withdrawal time measurement.Endoscopy · 2026Trial
- Study on the diagnostic value of lipid and systemic inflammatory markers in colorectal adenomatous polyps and the construction of a diagnostic model.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Implementing key quality performance metrics improves colorectal adenoma detection: Evidence from India.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Optical Imaging Technologies and Clinical Applications in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Traditional and Novel Colonoscopy Quality Metrics: What's Important in 2025.Current gastroenterology reports · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: High-quality colonoscopy reduces the risks of colorectal cancer by increasing the adenoma detection rate. Routine use of an automatic quality control system (AQCS) to assist in colorectal adenoma detection should be considered. Objective: To evaluate the effect of an AQCS on the adenoma detection rate among colonoscopists who were moderate- and low-level detectors during routine colonoscopy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, single-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted at 6 centers in China from August 1, 2021, to September 30, 2022. Data were analyzed from March 1 to June 30, 2023. Individuals aged 18 to 80 years were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were a history of inflammatory bowel disease, advanced colorectal cancer, and polyposis syndromes; known colorectal polyps without complete removal previously; a history of colorectal surgery; known stenosis or obstruction with contraindication for biopsy or prior failed colonoscopy; pregnancy or lactation; and refusal to participate. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis was used. Interventions: Standard colonoscopy or AQCS-assisted colonoscopy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adenoma detection rate. Results: A total of 1254 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.21 [12.10] years; 674 [53.7%] male) were randomized (627 standard colonoscopy, 627 AQCS-assisted colonoscopy). Intention-to-treat analysis showed a significantly higher adenoma detection rate in the AQCS-assisted group vs standard colonoscopy group (32.7% vs 22.6%; relative risk [RR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.23-2.09; P < .001). The adenoma detection rates were significantly higher in the AQCS group when considering pathology (nonadvanced adenomas, 30.1% vs 21.2%; RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.16-1.99; P = .002), and morphology (flat or sessile, 29.3% vs 20.4%, RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.16-2.00; P = .003). Use of AQCS significantly increased the adenoma detection rate of both the lower-level detectors (30.0% vs 20.0%; RR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.24-2.35; P = .001) and the medium-level detectors (38.1% vs 27.7%; RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.43; P = .02). Similar increases were found for adenoma detection rates in the academic and nonacademic centers (academic: 29.3% vs 20.8%; RR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.10-2.29; P = .01; nonacademic: 36.1% vs 24.5%; RR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.23-2.46; P = .002). The number of adenomas per colonoscopy was significantly higher in the AQCS-assisted group (0.86 vs 0.48; RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.17-1.91; P = .001). The mean withdrawal time without intervention was slightly increased with AQCS assistance (6.78 vs 6.46 minutes; RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.26-1.52; P < .001). No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, AQCS assistance during routine colonoscopy increased adenoma detection rates and several related polyp parameters compared with standard colonoscopy in the lower- and medium-level detectors in academic and nonacademic settings. Routine use of AQCS to assist in colorectal adenoma detection and quality improvement should be considered. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04901130.
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.