Evidence Hub

Diagnostic accuracy of computer-aided detection for colorectal polyps of any size, ≤ 5 mm, and 6-9 mm: a meta-analysis

Chen W, Li S, Wu Z, Tan H, Yu F, Wang D, Lin X, Chen Z

World journal of surgical oncology, 2026

Abstract

Background: Although computer-aided detection (CAD) is often used for medical diagnostic purposes, its diagnostic effectiveness in colorectal polyps (CPs) remains uncertain.

Objective: To summarize the diagnostic accuracy of CAD in diagnosing CPs, and provide a specific theoretical basis for clinical practice.

Methods: From database creation to August 1st 2024, we conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Wanfang, Cochrane Library, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). The pooled sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and Fagan plot analysis were employed to evaluate the overall performance of CAD tests. Furthermore, we assessed publication bias using Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test.

Results: The aggregated diagnostic data from 19 studies (any size), 12 studies (≤ 5 mm polyps) and 2 studies (6-9 mm polyps) were as follows: The sensitivity for polyps of any size, ≤ 5 mm, and 6-9 mm was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.96), 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.95) and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92-0.97), respectively. The specificity was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95), 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.93) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.88-0.92), respectively. The AUC was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.96-0.99), 0.96 (95% CI, 0.94-0.98), and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.89-0.94), respectively. Deeks' funnel plot showed that publication bias was not statistically significant in the diagnosis of polyps of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free