ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Colorectal polyp prevalence and adenoma detection rates in an Iranian cohort: a prospective study.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increased Prevalence of Colonic Polyps in Patients with Ampullary Adenoma or Carcinoma: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Epidemiology and risk factors of colorectal polyp detection: a regional, single-center retrospective study.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) prevention relies on early diagnosis and endoscopic resection of adenomatous polyps. This in turn depends on the quality of the performed colonoscopy. "Polyp detection rate, PDR" and "adenoma detection rate, ADR" are considered indices for quality of colonoscopy. This study aims to evaluate PDR and ADR, alongside the demographic, clinical, and pathological characteristics of colorectal polyps in an Iranian population. We also aimed to find the prevalence of colon polyps among different age groups.
methodsAll consenting patients 40 years of age or older undergoing screening colonoscopy or for possible IBS in a referral center in Tehran over 10 years were enrolled. We collected demographic data, quality of colon preparation, time to cecum, withdrawal time and colonoscopic findings. PDR and ADR were calculated and correlated with the above-mentioned indices.
resultsA total of 3,416 (mean age 57.6 ± 9.8 years) people meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled. Successful ileal intubation occurred in 54.6%. PDR was 41.5% (95% CI: 39.9-43.3%) being higher in men (46.8% vs. 36.9%; p = 0.01). Individuals aged 45-49 years exhibited a greater likelihood of colorectal polyps than younger counterparts (34.2% vs. 21.9%, p = 0.001). Overall ADR was 26.4% (95% CI: 25.01-27.9%), with patients older than 50 years having a higher rate (29.3% vs. 16.3%).
conclusionOur data shows acceptable PDR and ADR in this referral center and higher prevalence of adenomatous polyps in men in accordance with western reports. In addition, according to our data substantial proportion of individuals aged 45-49 years were found to harbor adenomatous polyps, aligning with trends observed in Western populations. If further research confirms these findings, it could provide a rationale for considering the initiation of colorectal cancer screening at age 45 in Iran.
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.