Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42569745›Full record

ReviewCureus2026

Artificial Intelligence for the Detection of Small Bowel Lesions and Neoplasia: A Scoping Review.

Faure Rodriguez Velasquez, Andres Montoya, Daniela Riaño-Pineda, Gabriela Urdinola, Alejandra Sogamoso-Bohórquez, Juan Galves-Cetina, Eduardo Tuta-Quintero

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

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

7 authors.

Faure Rodriguez VelasquezGastroenterology, Universidad de La Sabana, Bogotá, COL.
Andres MontoyaGastroenterology, Fundación Clínica Shaio, Bogotá, COL.
Daniela Riaño-PinedaInternal Medicine, Universidad de La Sabana, Bogotá, COL.
Gabriela UrdinolaInternal Medicine, Universidad de La Sabana, Bogotá, COL.
Alejandra Sogamoso-BohórquezGastroenterology, EndoGut Research Group, Bogotá, COL.
Juan Galves-CetinaMedicina Interna-Oncología, Hospital Militar Central, Bogotá, COL.
Eduardo Tuta-QuinteroEpidemiology and Public Health, Universidad de La Sabana, Bogotá, COL.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising tool for improving the detection and characterization of small bowel (SB) lesions through endoscopic imaging. This scoping review mapped and synthesized the available evidence on the diagnostic performance of AI systems applied to capsule endoscopy (CE) and device-assisted enteroscopy for identifying SB lesions with potential malignant or premalignant relevance. The review was conducted according to the methodological frameworks of Arksey and O'Malley, Levac, and the Joanna Briggs Institute, and was reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) recommendations. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase, including original studies that evaluated AI systems on SB endoscopic images or videos and reported quantitative diagnostic metrics. A total of 13 studies were included, most of them retrospective in design. The majority originated from China and Japan, and capsule endoscopy was the most commonly used imaging modality. Automated lesion detection represented the principal application of AI, often combined with diagnostic classification tasks. Most models were based on convolutional neural networks, including architectures such as ResNet50, Single Shot Multibox Detector, YOLOv5, and nnU-Net. Across studies, diagnostic performance was consistently high, with sensitivities ranging from 81.2% to 98.6%, specificities from 88.6% to 99.8%, and area under the ROC curve values close to 1.0 in several reports. AI appears to improve the detection of SB lesions and significantly reduce endoscopic reading times, particularly in capsule endoscopy. However, the current evidence remains insufficient to support the use of AI as a screening tool for SB cancer, as most available studies are retrospective and lack robust prospective multicenter validation.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecancerendoscopysmall bowelsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42569745
PMCPMC13450705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.