ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2026
Endoscopists' attitudes toward and experiences with artificial intelligence-assisted colonoscopy: a 3-year follow-up survey after the implementation of GI Genius.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeArtificial intelligence (AI) can improve colonoscopy quality by increasing adenoma detection rates. At Sengkang General Hospital (SKH), Singapore, AI-assisted colonoscopy was introduced in July 2021. An initial survey suggested that attitudes toward AI were shaped more by hands-on experience than by general knowledge of AI. This follow-up survey assessed how these attitudes evolved over time and compared responses from SKH with those from endoscopists at institutions without routine AI use.
methodsAn online survey was conducted 3 years after implementation of routine AI-assisted colonoscopy at SKH to evaluate endoscopists' knowledge, perceptions, and behaviors regarding AI. Endoscopists from 7 tertiary institutions in Singapore were invited to participate. The 44-item questionnaire covered 4 thematic domains. Responses were compared with those from SKH's initial survey and across institutions.
resultsA total of 57 endoscopists, including 46 consultants and 11 residents, completed the survey. Most respondents were familiar with AI, but only approximately half understood its underlying mechanisms. Most endoscopists supported early AI training, although agreement was significantly lower at SKH than at other hospitals (62.0% vs. 88.9%, P=0.02). Overall, 91.2% agreed that AI should be used as an adjunct to colonoscopy, and 80.7% agreed that AI can improve the quality of a performed colonoscopy. Enjoyment of AI-assisted colonoscopy was higher at SKH than at other hospitals (85.7% vs. 58.3%, P=0.04).
conclusionEndoscopists generally perceived AI as improving colonoscopy quality. Greater colonoscopy experience and more extensive exposure to AI-assisted colonoscopy appeared to be associated with more positive attitudes toward AI and greater acceptance of its potential benefits.
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.