Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42681912›Full record

ArticleClinical endoscopy2026

Impact of expert-curated video training data on computer-aided detection of sessile serrated lesions: a retrospective study in Korea.

Jaehee Han, Sang-Il Oh, Piljoo Kim, Kyung-Nam Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jaehee HanHanaro Medical Foundation, Seoul, Korea. crushpear@naver.com.
Sang-Il OhWaycen Inc., Seoul, Korea.
Piljoo KimWaycen Inc., Seoul, Korea.
Kyung-Nam KimWaycen Inc., Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComputer-aided detection (CADe) improves adenoma detection; however, its performance for sessile serrated lesion (SSL) detection remains inconsistent. We hypothesized that models trained on expert-curated, histopathologically-confirmed datasets would improve SSL detection compared to models trained on public datasets without verified labels.

methodsTwo CADe models with identical Visual Geometry Group 16 architectures were trained using different datasets: Model A on public datasets (~54,000 frames) and model B on a histopathologically-confirmed private dataset (~120,000 frames) derived from examinations performed by endoscopists with adenoma detection rates of >35%. Validation was conducted using 31 independent colonoscopy videos obtained from another endoscopist. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using event- and frame-based analyses.

resultsModel B demonstrated a significantly higher event-based sensitivity than model A (99.7% vs. 39.9%, p<0.001). The detection of SSLs was markedly improved with model B. Frame-based sensitivity and F1-score were also higher for model B. Although model B generated more false positives per video (2.55 vs. 0.16, p<0.001), these alerts were brief and unlikely to meaningfully interfere with the endoscopic workflow.

conclusionsCADe models trained on expert-curated, histopathologically-confirmed datasets showed improved detection of neoplastic colorectal lesions, including SSLs, compared to models trained on public datasets. These findings highlight the importance of clinically curated datasets for optimizing the CADe performance for subtle colorectal lesions.

Indexed as

AdenomaArtificial intelligenceColonoscopyColorectal neoplasmsDeep learning

Identifiers

PMID42681912
PMCPMC13624777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.