ArticleJournal of the anus, rectum and colon2026
Development of an Artificial Intelligence for Detecting False Positive Detection to Manage the Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Colonoscopy.
Article in Journal of the anus, rectum and colon, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: False positive detection (FPD) is a clinically relevant challenge that must be solved to ensure the safe and effective integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into colonoscopy. This study aimed to develop a novel AI system for quantifying FPD and to compare FPD rates between two commercially available AI platforms. Methods: From October 2022 to May 2025, a total of 436,637 images were collected from 78 patient colonoscopy videos: 38 videos (340,121 images) using CAD EYE (Fujifilm, Tokyo, Japan) and 40 videos (96,516 images) using EndoBRAIN (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Using these images, YOLOv8 convolutional neural networks were applied to construct original AI model for FPD analysis: ARBS-YOLOv8 (with active learning). The performance of the model was validated using the CAD EYE and EndoBRAIN clinical videos. Results: For CAD EYE validation, ARBS-YOLOv8 achieved an accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F1 score of 99.22%, 99.51%, 99.97%, 99.96%, and 99.90%, respectively. For EndoBRAIN validation, the ARBS-YOLOv8 results were 99.97%, 99.84%, 99.97%, 99.97%, and 99.90%, respectively. The false-positive and false-negative rates of FPD detection were only 0.04% and 0.03% for CAD EYE and 0.03% and 0.03% for EndoBRAIN. In 13 collected clinical videos (7 CAD EYE, 6 EndoBRAIN), ARBS-YOLOv8 identified total FPD rates of 8.08% for CAD EYE and 2.47% for EndoBRAIN, showing a significant difference (p<0.001). Conclusion: We developed the first AI system capable of objectively measuring FPD during colonoscopy under two commercially available AI platforms. The model validated performance differences between CAD EYE and EndoBRAIN, providing a basis for FPD reduction and safe AI endoscopy.
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.