ReviewBMJ open gastroenterology2025
Machine learning in gastrointestinal endoscopy: challenges and opportunities.
Review in BMJ open 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.
- AI Revolution in Upper GI: Endoscopic Diagnosis of Gastric Cancers and Premalignant Neoplasms.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Cholangioscopy: A New Frontier for Indeterminate Biliary Strictures.Euroasian journal of hepato-gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of machine learning (ML) into medical diagnostics has significantly advanced endoscopic examinations for gastrointestinal diseases. By leveraging extensive datasets and sophisticated algorithms, ML technologies enhance diagnostic precision, detect subtle abnormalities, classify diverse pathologies and predict disease progression. However, their widespread adoption is hindered by the inherent heterogeneity of gastrointestinal diseases, technical limitations, limited generalisability across different populations and ethical challenges related to patient privacy, data security and algorithmic bias.This review provides a comprehensive structural analysis of ML approaches in endoscopy, starting with an overview of the classical endoscopic methodology that relies on direct visualisation of the gastrointestinal tract for diagnosis and therapeutic interventions. Then, current ML applications that hold promise for reducing physician-dependent variability, improving diagnostic accuracy and streamlining procedural workflows were explored. Despite these advances, the effectiveness of ML models often remains constrained by the quality and diversity of training data, which can undermine both reliability and generalisability.Ethical considerations - such as safeguarding patient information, upholding data security and mitigating biases embedded in algorithms - are integral to responsibly deploying ML in clinical settings. By examining these technical and ethical barriers, this work contributes to the evolving discourse on integrating advanced ML techniques into gastroenterology. Ultimately, our goal is to pave the way for more effective and reliable ML-driven endoscopic practices that will enhance disease detection, optimise patient care and benefit healthcare providers worldwide.
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.