TRV-2026-1640Certified recordPeer-reviewed

Improving Postpolypectomy Surveillance Decisions Using an Automated Analysis of Colonoscopy and Histopathology Reports: 2-Center Validation Study

Background: Postpolypectomy surveillance intervals derived from colonoscopy findings and histopathology should be guideline-based, yet these are frequently not adhered to, contributing to under- and oversurveillance. This motivates a more structured and automated approach to improve adherence. Objective: We developed and evaluated an automated, implementable, guideline-aligned decision support tool that extracts colorectal polyp features from free-text colonoscopy and histopathology reports and produces auditabl…

Health · Good Space — documented gain · certified 2026-10-17 · v1 · article view · machine-readable

Current reading — gain

A hybrid pipeline of open-weight language models and a deterministic guideline rule engine reached 0.93 to 0.96 recommendation accuracy across two NHS trusts and would mainly reduce potential undersurveillance.

What this doesn’t fix

The evaluation was retrospective and used small cohorts of 100 patients per site, and the authors describe only the potential to improve safety netting and adherence, not a demonstrated clinical effect.

Evidence

Reader signal

How should this claim be treated?

Cite this record

Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-1640, v1: “Improving Postpolypectomy Surveillance Decisions Using an Automated Analysis of Colonoscopy and Histopathology Reports: 2-Center Validation Study.” Truvace, 2026-10-17. /record/TRV-2026-1640 (accessed at citation time). sha256 86dfe5be2f287ba7…

Calibration history

Every change to this record since certification, in the open. None yet — the reading has held since it entered the record.

  1. Certifiedv186dfe5be2f28…

    Certified into the record

Verify this record
How to verify without trusting this page

Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-1640 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.