ArticleTechniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy2024
Development and Validation of an Automated, Real-time Adenoma Detection Rate and Colonoscopy Quality Metrics Calculator.
Article in Techniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Enhancing colonoscopy reporting quality: impact of structured templates and educational tutorials on automated adenoma detection rate reporting tool performance.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsHigh-quality colonoscopy reduces the risk of death from colorectal cancer. The adenoma detection rate (ADR) is the principal measure of colonoscopy quality but is onerous to calculate. We report the development of a fully automated platform for calculation of the ADR and other key colonoscopy quality indicators without the need for manual data entry.
methodsEndoscopy and pathology reports from 6 centers were collected over a 3-month period and collated using a novel data transfer interface. Text-based classification parameters were developed to identify average-risk screening colonoscopies, adenomatous pathology, cecal intubation, and withdrawal time. Automated quality metrics calculators based on these classifications were built into a web-based reporting platform, and the resulting quality metrics were benchmarked against those produced through a manual record review. Confirmation of the calculator's performance was performed in a validation cohort with data collected over a 1-month period, 6 months after the initial study.
resultsThe study included 3809 colonoscopies (mean age 56.1 ± 6.40 years, 53.7% female, 38 endoscopists). The automated calculator yielded an ADR of 45.1% compared with 44.3% on manual review. Correct classification of ADR-qualifying screening colonoscopies was achieved with high predictive value, with a sensitivity of 0.918 and specificity of 1.0. The cecal intubation rate was 95.8%, and the average withdrawal time was 10:05 minutes.
conclusionWe demonstrate the feasibility and performance of a colonoscopy quality reporting platform capable of calculating the ADR and other key metrics using novel, fully automated pathology report integration and a text query-based classification accessible in a wide range of practice settings.
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.