Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 818

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The National Polyp Study

Open access
O'Brien, Michael J., Winawer, Sidney J., Zauber, Ann Graham, Gottlieb, Leonard S., Sternberg, Stephen S., Diaz, Barbara, Dickersin, G.Richard, Ewing, Stephen, Geller, Stephen, Kasimian, Dennis, Komorowski, Richard, Szporn, Arnold·1990·Gastroenterology

Abstract

The National Polyp Study (NPS), a randomized clinical trial to evaluate effective surveillance of patients discovered to have one or more colorectal adenomas, was the framework for this statistical analysis which used a multiple logistic model to assess the independent risk factors of patient and polyp characteristics associated with high-grade dysplasia in adenomas. The database included 3371 adenomas from 1867 patients. Adenoma size and the extent of the villous component were found to be the major independent polyp risk factors associated with high-grade dysplasia (p less than 0.0001). The adjusted odds ratios were 3.3 for medium-sized adenomas and 7.7 for large adenomas relative to small adenomas and 2.7 for villous A adenomas, 3.4 for villous B adenomas, and 8.1 for villous C and D adenomas relative to tubular adenomas. Increased frequency of high-grade dysplasia in adenomas located distal to the splenic flexure was attributable mainly to increased size and villous component rather than to location per se. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.4 (p less than 0.11) for left-sided location. Multiplicity of adenomas affected the risk for high-grade dysplasia in patients but was dependent on adenoma size and villous component and was not an independent factor. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.3 (p less than 0.17) for multiplicity. Increasing age was associated with risk for high-grade dysplasia in patients, and this effect was independent of the effect of adenoma size and histological type. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.8 (p less than 0.0016) for age greater than or equal to 60 yr. Gender was not associated with high-grade dysplasia. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.0 (p less than 0.95) for men. The size of the patient series, the prospective nature of the data collection, the completeness of information on all patients, the requirements of complete examination of the entire colon and pathological examination of all lesions encountered, and the exclusion of patients with previously diagnosed adenomas are, collectively, features unique to this study. The detailed model provided by the analysis integrates multiple patient and adenoma factors associated with high-grade dysplasia in colorectal adenomas.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0016-5085(90)90827-n

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 818

Metadata

Authors
O'Brien, M. J., Winawer, S. J., Zauber, A. G., Gottlieb, L. S., Sternberg, S. S., Diaz, B., Dickersin, G. R., Ewing, S., Geller, S., Kasimian, D., Komorowski, R., & Szporn, A.
Venue
Gastroenterology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1990-02
Volume
98
Issue
2
Pages
371-379
ISSN
0016-5085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1594235143
Cited by
818
References
0
FWCI
7.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The National Polyp Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0016-5085(90)90827-n
The paper
O'Brien, M. J., Winawer, S. J., Zauber, A. G., Gottlieb, L. S., Sternberg, S. S., Diaz, B., Dickersin, G. R., Ewing, S., Geller, S., Kasimian, D., Komorowski, R., & Szporn, A. (1990). The National Polyp Study. Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-5085(90)90827-n

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.