ArticleEndoscopy international open2026
Assessing realism of artificial intelligence-generated colorectal polyp images: International multicenter blinded reader study.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07108569 (Ability of Physicians to Distinguish Real From Artificial Colon Polyp Images), which is not on this 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.
Ability of Physicians to Distinguish Real From Artificial Colon Polyp Images
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Prevention of colorectal cancer relies on detection and characterization of polyps during colonoscopy, yet access to large, shareable training datasets is limited. To address this issue, we developed a diffusion-based artificial intelligence (AI) model to generate synthetic polyp images in high-resolution and assessed their perceived realism in an international blinded reader study. Patients and methods: Fifty-three endoscopists from 46 centers across 14 countries evaluated 20 real and 20 AI-generated images in random order using our web platform Lutetia. Experts classified the images as either real or synthetic and rated their confidence. The primary endpoint was sensitivity of identifying synthetic images. Secondary endpoints were recognition of real images and overall accuracy. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov with the identifier NCT07108569. Results: Sensitivity for detecting AI-generated images was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI] 65%-67%) with a specificity of 80% (95% CI 79%-81%); overall accuracy was 73% (95% CI 72%-73%). Low-confidence decisions were more frequent for AI-generated images and associated with longer annotation time ( Conclusions: Difficulties in differentiating synthetic from real images together with lower confidence and longer decision times shows that our diffusion model generates highly realistic polyp images.
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.