Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 259

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy

BELSEY, J., EPSTEIN, O., HERESBACH, D.·2007·Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Summary: Background: There are many published trials of colon cleansing regimens for colonoscopy but no clear consensus regarding relative performance. Aim: To identify high quality controlled trials comparing two or more bowel preparation regimens and to compare efficacy and tolerability. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review was carried out to identify candidate studies. Quality appraisal was carried out on all identified studies. Results were meta‐analysed where possible and qualitatively compared if not. Results: Eighty‐two studies qualified for analysis. Polyethylene glycol and sodium phosphate were the most frequently investigated preparations. There was no significant efficacy difference between the two, but sodium phosphate was better tolerated. Sodium picosulphate/magnesium citrate, a commonly prescribed preparation, was investigated in four studies, with no clear benefit over other regimens demonstrated. Safety was not recognized as a problem in the randomized controlled trials. Published case series demonstrate that sodium phosphate is associated with the highest risk of clinically significant electrolyte disturbances. Conclusion: Shortcomings in study design limit the value of many of the studies. Based on these results, no single bowel preparation emerges as consistently superior. New preparations are required that combine better efficacy and tolerability, in addition to rigorous new validated study designs, allowing unequivocal comparisons to be made.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03212.x

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 28 references

Cited by

See all 259

Metadata

Authors
BELSEY, J., EPSTEIN, O., & HERESBACH, D.
Venue
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-12-07
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
373-384
ISSN
  • 0269-2813 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2036
OpenAlex
W1479670292
Cited by
259
References
28
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03212.x
The paper
BELSEY, J., EPSTEIN, O., & HERESBACH, D. (2007). Systematic review: oral bowel preparation for colonoscopy. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03212.x

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.