ArticleScientific reports2026
Development and validation of a novel scoring scale for colonic endocytoscopy staining quality.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background While endocytoscopy allows for in vivo cellular-level observation, achieving high-quality staining remains a technical challenge. Aims To develop and validate a simple, reliable scale for assessing and improving endocytoscopic staining quality. Methods We developed a four-dimension staining quality score and validated it on a retrospective image cohort (n = 2692). The scale's reliability, validity, and internal consistency were assessed, and associated factors were identified using multinomial regression. The scale was then externally validated in a separate retrospective image cohort (n = 2413) to confirm its clinical applicability. Results The scale showed inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.992) and reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.81), with a single principal factor explaining 62.3% of variance.The Spearman correlation between the gold standard score and AOD value was 0.81. Staining quality was influenced by lesion characteristics and physician experience (P < 0.05). After one month of training, junior physicians showed improved agreement with gold standard scores, with Kappa values rising from 0.61, 0.66, and 0.69 to 0.81, 0.83, and 0.82. Higher staining quality was also significantly associated with better concordance between Endocytoscopy imaging and histopathology (P < 0.001). Conclusion This endocytoscopic staining quality score is a reliable and valid tool to guide technique refinement and improve diagnostic accuracy.
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.