Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42553759›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology2026

Human-machine interaction in optical polyp diagnosis: decision-making after CADx polyp diagnosis.

Delphine Dubois, Yousr Jalal, Heiko Pohl, Douglas K Rex, Cesare Hassan, Roupen Djinbachian, Megan Oleksiw, Victoire Michal, Daniel von Renteln

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06822816 (Creation of a Video/Image Library of Annotated Full-length Endoscopy Procedures for the Development of Artificial Intelligence-empowered Endoscopy Quality Reporting and Educational Modules), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06822816 recruitingnot on this map

Creation of a Video/Image Library of Annotated Full-length Endoscopy Procedures for the Development of Artificial Intelligence-empowered Endoscopy Quality Reporting and Educational Modules

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorCentre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM)Ran2022 to 2028Enrolled10,000ConditionsPolyp of Colon, Artificial Intelligence (AI)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Delphine DuboisUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, H2X0A9, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5538-5435
Yousr JalalUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, H2X0A9, Canada.
Heiko PohlDepartment of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, White River Junction, VT and The Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH 05009, United States.
Douglas K RexDivision of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, IN University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, United States.
Cesare HassanGastroenterology, Endoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, 20089, Italy.
Roupen DjinbachianUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, H2X0A9, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0649-0691
Megan OleksiwUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, H2X0A9, Canada.
Victoire MichalUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, H2X0A9, Canada.
Daniel von RentelnUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Center (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, H2X0A9, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI)-based computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) systems are increasingly used to classify colorectal polyps during colonoscopy, but their impact depends on how endoscopists interpret AI predictions. This study aimed to evaluate endoscopists' decision-making after reviewing CADx outputs, using histopathology diagnosis as ground truth. Patients and methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a prospective study (NCT06822816) conducted at our centre between 2022 and 2025. All patients and polyps ≤10 mm with documented CADx output and endoscopist diagnosis were included. Endoscopists either accepted CADx classifications (neoplastic vs hyperplastic) or provided alternatives. Our primary outcome was the accuracy of accepted CADx diagnoses; secondary outcomes assessed reclassification patterns after CADx output rejection. Results: Our cohort included 754 polyps <10 mm from 367 patients. Accepted CADx diagnoses were correct for 89.1% of neoplastic and 68.7% of hyperplastic CADx predictions. Endoscopists accepted incorrect CADx classifications more frequently when these were neoplastic compared to hyperplastic (64.9% vs 26.5%). Upon rejecting correct CADx neoplastic predictions, endoscopists misclassified 23.4% as sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). Similarly, 29.5% of rejected correct CADx hyperplastic predictions were incorrectly reassigned as SSLs. Conclusions: Endoscopists exhibit a diagnostic bias toward neoplasia, particularly misclassifying hyperplastic polyps as SSLs. While this may enhance safety, it may risk unnecessary surveillance colonoscopies and increase costs.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecolonoscopydiagnosisendoscopyopticspolyp colorectal

Identifiers

PMID42553759
PMCPMC13436811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.