Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 21, 2026; 32(27): 118009
Published online Jul 21, 2026. doi: 10.3748/wjg.118009
Published online Jul 21, 2026. doi: 10.3748/wjg.118009
Table 2 Meta regression analysis for possible factors affecting the sensitivity of computer-aided diagnosis in distinguishing sessile serrated lesions from non-sessile serrated lesions and hyperplastic polyps
| Factors | Sensitivity (SSL vs non-SSLs) | Sensitivity (SSL vs HPs) | ||||||
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||||
| P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | P value | OR (95%CI) | |
| Publication time (vs year 2020) | 0.67 | 1.77 (0.13-23.36) | 0.48 | 2.49 (0.20-31.49) | ||||
| Multicenter (vs single center) | 0.10 | 0.09 (0.01-1.61) | 0.06 | 0.03 (0.00-1.19) | 0.14 | 0.10 (0.00-2.09) | ||
| Europe (vs Asia) | 0.67 | 1.77 (0.13-23.36) | 0.64 | 1.97 (0.12-33.01) | ||||
| Prospective (vs retrospective) | 0.67 | 1.77 (0.13-23.36) | 0.33 | 3.40 (0.29-39.44) | ||||
| Olympus (vs Fujifilm) | 0.83 | 0.66 (0.02-27.83) | 0.11 | 6.84 (0.65-72.26) | ||||
| Criteria 2019 (vs 2010) | 0.06 | 11.15 (0.90-138.8) | 0.07 | 2.97 (0.92-9.53) | 0.19 | 4.55 (0.47-43.74) | ||
| ICA (vs ODA) | < 0.01 | 16.22 (7.73-34.05) | < 0.01 | 14.13 (6.89-29.01) | 0.18 | 5.28 (0.47-59.22) | ||
| Real time (vs nonreal time) | 0.10 | 0.09 (0.01-1.61) | 0.58 | 0.41 (0.02-9.53) | ||||
| Images (vs videos) | 0.67 | 0.57 (0.04-7.47) | 0.64 | 0.51 (0.03-8.48) | ||||
| NBI (vs non-NBI) | 0.47 | 2.68 (0.18-39.61) | 0.01 | 10.80 (1.97-59.33) | 0.02 | 7.27 (1.40-37.63) | ||
- Citation: Zhang S, Wang SH, Zhao YD, Wei JH, Sui XY, Li X, Zhang HW, Huang ZY, Wang CL, Hu H, Zhang J, Li ZS, Zhao SB, Bai Y. Performance of computer-aided diagnosis for colorectal sessile serrated lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2026; 32(27): 118009
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v32/i27/118009.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.118009