Peer-Reviewed Publication
J Med Internet Res2026;28e102789.October 16, 2026Journal Article

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

Agathe Zecevic1,2, Sabina De Martino3, Joshua Shan Chen Lee4, Victoria To4, Vedant Bhardwaj4, Rhea Sibal4, Nigel Trudgill5,6, Shahd A Mohamed5, Angus Roberts7, Sebastian Zeki1,3
1School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, Great Maze Pond, SE1 1UL, United Kingdom, London, United Kingdom.
2Clinical Scientific Computing, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
3Gastroenterology Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Gassiot House, St Thomas' Hospital, Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7EH, United Kingdom.
4GKT School of Medical Education, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
5Gastroenterology Department, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, West Bromwich, United Kingdom.
6Department of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
7Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Abstract

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 to…

Create a free account to keep reading

Free members get 10 full research views every month across publications, clinical trials, FDA clearances, adverse events, and NIH grants. No credit card required.

Want unlimited research access? See Pro plans

Data Accuracy Notice: Research intelligence on Health AI Central is aggregated from public sources (PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, NIH, CMS, and others) and refreshed nightly. Classifications and derived metrics are produced by automated methods described in our Methodology. We recommend verifying critical data points against the primary sources before making decisions.