ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Development and validation of an artificial intelligence-assisted system for automatic Boston scoring of bowel cleanliness in colonoscopy (with video).
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. 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.
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Colonoscopy for Colorectal Lesion Detection: Current Evidence, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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
Background: Bowel cleanliness is a critical factor affecting the detection of adenomatous polyps and early tumors. The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS), a widely used evaluation tool, has limitations, including interobserver variability and insufficient standardized training. This study aims to develop an artificial intelligence-driven automatic BBPS scoring and teaching system. Methods: Colonoscopy image and video data were collected from three centers between June 2019 and August 2024, categorized into different BBPS scores (0, 1, 2, 3), ileocecal part, and instrument operation frames. Transfer learning and fine-tuning were performed on four pre-trained YOLOv11 models. Performance metrics included accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and AUC. Grad-CAM was used to provide visual explanations of the best-performing model, which was further developed into a system capable of real-time and cumulative BBPS assessment for every video frame. Results: Among the four models, YOLOv11m performed the best, achieving an accuracy of 99.86%, precision of 99.74%, sensitivity of 99.74%, and an F1 score of 99.75% on the validation set. On the test set, the model attained a weighted average precision of 95.37%, specificity of 98.25%, and an AUC of 0.996. Based on this model, the AutoBBPS system was developed, which automatically initiates real-time cumulative BBPS scoring once the cecum is reached. In image-level human-machine comparison experiments, the system outperformed junior endoscopists in recognition accuracy and was comparable to senior endoscopists. Video-level human-machine comparison experiments further evaluated the accuracy of the AutoBBPS system against endoscopists under varying confidence thresholds. Conclusion: The AutoBBPS system, developed using YOLOv11, provides real-time and cumulative BBPS scoring for every video frame, effectively assisting endoscopists in improving scoring efficiency and accuracy. Additionally, the intelligent BBPS teaching assistant is particularly beneficial for junior endoscopists, promoting standardized training and enhancing overall scoring quality.
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.