ArticleClinical and translational gastroenterology2026
Higher Sessile Serrated Lesion Detection Rates Calculated Using All Examinations Are Associated With Lower Risk for Postcolonoscopy Colorectal Cancer: Data From the New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry.
Article in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCalculating detection rates using data from colonoscopies for all indications, rather than screening examinations, is simpler and can mitigate gaming by endoscopists. We hypothesized that calculating sessile serrated lesion detection rates (SSLDR-A) using all examinations may also be a quality metric for predicting postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) risk.
methodsThe cohort included New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry 115,762 patients with an index colonoscopy. The primary outcome was PCCRC, defined as colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosed ≥6 months after the index colonoscopy. The exposure variables were endoscopist-specific SSLDR-A (using all examinations) and SSLDR-S (using screening examinations), stratified into quintiles. Cox regression was used to model the hazard of PCCRC on SSLDR, adjusting for relevant covariates, such as patient age and sex.
resultsThere were 177 PCCRCs diagnosed in 115,762 patients with index colonoscopies. Higher SSLDR-A and SSLDR-S rates were associated with lower PCCRC risks. After adjusting for covariates, we observed that higher SSLDR-A rates were associated with lower hazard ratios (HRs) as compared with the reference group (SSLDR-A: <1.5%; HR = 1.0 vs SSLDR-A: 1.5% to <3.0%; HR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.35-0.79; SSLDR-A: 3.0% to <5.0%; HR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.38-0.92; SSLDR: 5.0% to <8.0%; HR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.28-0.70; and SSLDR: 8.0+%; HR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.08-0.46). The highest quintile of SSLDR-A (8.0%+) (HR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.08-0.46) and SSLDR-S (8.0%+) (HR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.09-0.44) provided similar protection from PCCRC. DISCUSSION: These findings demonstrate that colonoscopies performed by endoscopists with higher SSLDR-A are associated with a lower risk of PCCRC, validating SSLDR-A as a quality metric. Furthermore, our data suggest that endoscopists should aim for an SSLDR-A of 6% and have an aspirational SSLDR-A of 8.0% or higher.
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.