ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Improvement in adenoma detection rate by artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: Multicenter quasi-randomized controlled trial.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled 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
- Bowel preparation and adenoma detection in AI-assisted colonoscopy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Patients' experiences and attitudes toward the use of real-time artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Article
- Endoscopists' attitudes toward and experiences with artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: a 3-year follow-up survey after the implementation of GI Genius.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
- AI for screening in healthcare: promise and challenges.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence and digital transformation of gastroenterology and hepatology: A critical review of clinical applications and future challenges.World journal of hepatology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: Hidden Fragilities and the Path to Resilience.Saudi medical journal · 2026Review
- Diagnostic performance of real-time characterization in artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Human-machine collaboration in colorectal cancer screening: a narrative review of artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- 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
- The role of artificial intelligence in gastroenterology: current perspectives and future directions-narrative review.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Endoscopic and Ultrasound Imaging for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: A Narrative Review of Recent Clinical Applications, Implementation Strategies, and Challenges.Journal of healthcare leadership · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a key performance measure with variability among endoscopists. Artificial intelligence (AI) in colonoscopy could reduce this variability and has shown to improve ADR. This study assessed the impact of AI on ADR among Danish endoscopists of varying experience levels. Patients and methods: We conducted a prospective, quasi-randomized, controlled, multicenter trial involving patients aged 18 and older undergoing screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopy at four centers. Participants were assigned to AI-assisted colonoscopy (GI Genius, Medtronic) or conventional colonoscopy. Endoscopists were classified as experts (> 1000 colonoscopies) or non-experts (≤ 1000 colonoscopies). The primary outcome was ADR. We performed a subgroup analysis stratified on endoscopist experience and a subset analysis of the screening population. Results: A total of 795 patients were analyzed: 400 in the AI group and 395 in the control group. The AI group demonstrated a significantly higher ADR than the control group (59.1% vs. 46.6%, Conclusions: AI-assisted colonoscopy significantly increased ADR by 12.5% overall, with a notable 16.3% increase in the screening population. The unchanged NNRR indicates that the higher PDR was due to increased ADR, not unnecessary resections.
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.