Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36845807›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2023

The effectiveness of real-time computer-aided and quality control systems in colorectal adenoma and polyp detection during colonoscopies: a meta-analysis.

Muhammad Fawad Aslam, Shehar Bano, Mariam Khalid, Zouina Sarfraz, Azza Sarfraz, Muzna Sarfraz, Karla Robles-Velasco, Miguel Felix, Kitson Deane, Ivan Cherrez-Ojeda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

10 authors.

Muhammad Fawad AslamDepartments of Medicine.
Shehar BanoDepartment of Research and Publications, Fatima Jinnah Medical University.
Mariam KhalidDepartment of Medical Education, Rai Medical College, Sargodha.ORCID 0000-0003-3085-6128
Zouina SarfrazDepartment of Research and Publications, Fatima Jinnah Medical University.ORCID 0000-0002-5132-7455
Azza SarfrazDepartment of Pediatrics, Aga Khan University, Karachi.
Muzna SarfrazDepartment of Medicine, King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Pakistan.
Karla Robles-VelascoUniversidad Espíritu Santo, Samborondón, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0001-7780-1015
Miguel FelixUniversidad Espíritu Santo, Samborondón, Ecuador.ORCID 0000-0002-2243-3646
Kitson DeaneWoodhull Medical and Mental Health Center, New York City, New York, USA.
Ivan Cherrez-OjedaDepartment of Medicine, King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Pakistan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This meta-analysis aims to quantify the effectiveness of artificial intelligence (AI)-supported colonoscopy compared to standard colonoscopy in adenoma detection rate (ADR) differences with the use of computer-aided detection and quality control systems. Moreover, the polyp detection rate (PDR) intergroup differences and withdrawal times will be analyzed. Methods: This study was conducted adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Studies were searched across PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science. Keywords including the following 'Artificial Intelligence, Polyp, Adenoma, Detection, Rate, Colonoscopy, Colorectal, Colon, Rectal' were used. Odds ratio (OR) applying 95% CI for PDR and ADR were computed. SMD with 95% CI for withdrawal times were computed using RevMan 5.4.1 (Cochrane). The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool. Results: Of 2562 studies identified, 11 trials were included comprising 6856 participants. Of these, 57.4% participants were in the AI group and 42.6% individuals were in in the standard group. ADR was higher in the AI group compared to the standard of care group (OR=1.51, Conclusion: AI-supported colonoscopies improve PDR and ADR; however, no noticeable worsening of withdrawal times is noted. Colorectal cancers are highly preventable if diagnosed early-on. With AI-assisted tools in clinical practice, there is a strong potential to reduce the incidence rates of cancers in the near future.

Indexed as

adenomacolorectalmeta-analysispolypstrialswithdrawal time

Identifiers

PMID36845807
PMCPMC9949794

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.