ArticleCureus2025
Artificial Intelligence in Colonoscopy: A Tool, Not a Necessity for Experts.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionArtificial intelligence (AI) tools for polyp detection during colonoscopy have shown promise in improving polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). However, in real-world settings, the results are inconsistent, particularly among experienced endoscopists. This study evaluates the impact of AI on ADR and PDR when used by a single high-volume, experienced endoscopist.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted from July 2019 to June 2023, involving colonoscopies performed by a single high-volume endoscopist. Patients undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy were included, while those with diagnostic indications were excluded. Outcomes were compared between two groups: pre-AI-assisted colonoscopy (pre-AIAC) (July 2019-June 2022) and AI-assisted colonoscopy (AIAC) (July 2022-June 2023).
resultsOf 1,273 colonoscopies, 814 met the inclusion criteria. Quality metrics, including the Boston Bowel Prep Score and withdrawal time greater than six minutes, were comparable between the groups. ADR was 151 (35%) in the pre-AIAC group and 116 (31%) in AIAC group, with no statistical significance (p = 0.2). Similarly, PDR, 184 (42%) vs. 145 (38%); p = 0.22, and adenomas per colonoscopy, 0.62 (1.23) vs. 0.51 (0.97); p = 0.22, showed no statistically significant differences. However, the mean withdrawal time was significantly shorter in the AIAC group (9.34 vs. 10.44 minutes; p < 0.0001).
conclusionAIAC may not significantly improve adenoma or PDRs when performed by an experienced endoscopist. However, it was associated with a significant reduction in mean withdrawal time. Further research is needed to explore these findings in broader clinical 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.