| Title |
Adenoma Detection Rate Falls at the End of the Day in a Large Multi-site Sample
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Digestive Diseases and Sciences, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10620-018-4947-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Felippe O. Marcondes, Rebecca A. Gourevitch, Robert E. Schoen, Seth D. Crockett, Michele Morris, Ateev Mehrotra |
| Abstract |
There is concern that mental and physical fatigue among endoscopists over the course of the day will lead to lower adenoma detection rate (ADR). There are mixed findings in the prior literature on whether such an association exists. The aim of this study was to measure the association between the number of colonoscopies performed in a day and ADR and withdrawal time. We analyzed 86,624 colonoscopy and associated pathology reports between October 2013 and September 2015 from 131 physicians at two medical centers. A previously validated natural language processing program was used to abstract relevant data. We identified the order of colonoscopies performed in the physicians' schedule and calculated the ADR and withdrawal time for each colonoscopy position. The ADR for our overall sample was 29.9 (CI 29.6-30.2). The ADR for colonoscopies performed at the 9th + position was significantly lower than those at the 1st-4th or 5th-8th position, 27.2 (CI 25.8-28.6) versus 29.9 (CI 29.5-30.3), 30.2 (CI 29.6-30.9), respectively. Withdrawal time steadily decreased by colonoscopy position going from 11.6 (CI 11.4-11.9) min for the 1st colonoscopy to 9.6 (8.9-10.3) min for the 9th colonoscopy. In our study population, ADR and withdrawal time decrease by roughly 7 and 20%, respectively, by the end of the day. Our results imply that rather than mental or physical fatigue, lower ADR at the end of the day might be driven by endoscopists rushing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 20 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,216,003
of 24,127,822 outputs
Outputs from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#104
of 4,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,946
of 445,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Digestive Diseases and Sciences
#4
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,127,822 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,483 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 445,855 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.