ReviewIntestinal research2026
Population-based screening colonoscopy in Korea: balancing benefits and limitations.
Review in Intestinal research, 2026. 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.
- From "When" to "Ready": Preparing for Primary Colonoscopy in the Korean National Colorectal Cancer Screening Program.Journal of Korean medical science · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Population-based colonoscopy screening is considered one of the most effective strategies for reducing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. Its major strength lies in its dual benefits: early detection of colorectal cancer and prevention via the removal of precancerous lesions. Colonoscopy has a high sensitivity and provides a full colonic evaluation in a single session, thereby reducing the need for frequent testing. However, this approach has notable limitations. Colonoscopy is an invasive procedure associated with rare but serious complications such as perforation and bleeding. Participation rates tend to be lower than those of noninvasive methods like fecal immunochemical tests. Additionally, implementing colonoscopy as a populationbased tool requires significant resources, including trained endoscopists, endoscopy facilities, and financial investments. The quality of colonoscopy may also vary depending on the operator's skill and adherence to guidelines. Given these trade-offs, population-based colonoscopy screening must be carefully evaluated in terms of cost-effectiveness, feasibility, and public acceptance within each country's healthcare system. Therefore, population-based colonoscopy screening should be approached with a balanced understanding of its benefits and limitations to ensure cost-effectiveness, feasibility, alignment with each country's healthcare infrastructure, and integration with existing screening programs.
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.