Cited by 179Colorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionAI in cancer detectionColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments

Study on detection rate of polyps and adenomas in artificial-intelligence-aided colonoscopy

Open access
Huang, Jin, Liu, Wen-Na, Zhang, Yang-Yang, Bian, Xu-Qiang, Wang, Li-Juan, Yang, Qiang, Zhang, Xi-Dou·2020·Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIM: To study the impact of computer-aided detection (CADe) system on the detection rate of polyps and adenomas in colonoscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1026 patients were prospectively randomly scheduled for colonoscopy with (the CADe group, CADe) or without (the control group, CON) the aid of the CADe system, together with visual notification and voice alarm, so as to compare the detection rate of polyp. RESULTS: Compared with group CON, the detection rate of adenomas increased in group CADe, the average number of adenomas increased, the number of small adenomas increased, the number of proliferative polyps increased, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.001), but the comparison for the number of larger adenomas showed no significant difference between the groups (P> 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The CADe system is feasible for increasing the detection of polyps and adenomas in colonoscopy.

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 · 10.4103/sjg.sjg_377_19

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Huang, J., Liu, W.-N., Zhang, Y.-Y., Bian, X.-Q., Wang, L.-J., Yang, Q., & Zhang, X.-D.
Affiliations
The 988th Hospital of the Joint Service Support Force of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (CN)
Corresponding author
Huang, Jin
Venue
Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology
Published
2020
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
13
ISSN
1319-3767 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2997497159
Cited by
179
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 23
FWCI
9.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Keywords
computer-aided detection, colonoscopy, colorectal polyps, colorectal adenoma, polyp detection rate, small adenomas, voice alarm
MeSH terms
Adenoma, Adult, Artificial Intelligence, Colonic Polyps, Colonoscopy, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies

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