CORRECTION

Article Figures & Data

Table 2.

Estimated Rates of Colonoscopy Quality Outcomes Using Random Effects Modeling

Study, Year	Estimated Adenoma Detection Rate (95% CI)	Estimated Adenocarcinoma Detection Rate (95% CI)	Estimated Reach-the-Cecum Rate (All Patients) (95% CI)	Perforations^a	Bleeding Not Requiring Transfusion^a
CI=confidence intervals.
Note: rates and 95% CIs calculated using random effect model.
^a Raw data shown.
^b Additional information about this study was provided by the author.
Godreau,²⁴ 1992	51.7 (44.0– 59.3)	2.2 (0.9– 5.7)	83.2 (76.6– 88.2)	0	0
Rodney et al.²⁵ 1993	8.8 (6.1– 12.5)	2.0 (0.9– 4.2)	48.7 (43.1– 54.4)	0	0
Hopper et al.²⁶ 1996	43.7 (40.7– 46.7)	Not reported	74.8 (72.1– 77.3)	0	0
Harper et al²⁷, 1997	20.9 (16.8– 25.8)	3.5 (2.0– 6.1)	87.1 (82.9– 90.4)	0	0
Pierzchajio et al.²⁸ 1997	24.7 (21.7– 27.9)	0.6 (0.3– 1.4)	91.4 (89.2– 93.2)	0	0
Carr et al.²⁹ 1998	33.4 (27.9– 39.5)	1.9 (0.8– 4.2)	82.2 (77.0– 86.4)	0	1
Kirby,³⁰ 2004	16.8 (14.0– 19.9)	2.3 (1.4– 3.8)	80.1 (76.8– 83.1)	0	0
Edwards and Norris,³¹ 2004	22.8 (17.6– 29.0)	2.3 (1.0– 5.2)	96.1 (92.4– 98.0)	0	0
Newman et al.³² 2005	32.5 (29.2– 36.0)	0.9 (0.5– 1.9)	92.7 (90.6– 94.4)	0	1
Strayer,³³ 2005^b	51.3 (45.1– 57.3)	0.8 (0.3– 2.6)	94.6 (91.1– 96.7)	0	0
Cotterill et al.³⁴ 2005	23.9 (19.6– 28.8)	0.7 (0.2– 2.2)	94.0 (90.9– 96.1)	0	0
Lloyd,³⁵ 2006^b	38.0 (37.2– 38.8)	0.5 (0.46– 0.54)	98.4 (98.2– 98.6)	3	2
Total	28.9 (20.4– 39.3)	1.7 (0.9– 3.0)	89.2 (80.1– 94.4)	3	4