UZ Brussel
Jette, Brussels Capital, 1090, Belgium
NCT Number: NCT07401004
This study investigates whether a brief educational intervention using Blink features can improve medical students' and non-GI trainees' ability to detect colorectal cancer in static polyp images. Secondary aims include evaluating changes in specificity, confidence, and interobserver agreement, determining which Blink features support accurate detection, and examining the link between the number of features recognized and diagnostic performance. The study will recruit medical students and non-GI trainees without prior training in polyp morphology or endoscopic image interpretation, who will complete an online pre- and post-intervention image-based survey.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Jette, Brussels Capital, 1090, Belgium
Background and Rationale:
Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality in Western countries, though it is largely preventable by detecting and removing precursor lesions such as colorectal polyps. While most polyps are small and benign, 1-2% are large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs), which carry a markedly higher risk of invasive cancer (reported rates 6-15%, depending on morphology, histology, and location).
Accurate optical diagnosis of cancer in LNPCPs is critical for guiding treatment strategy-piecemeal endoscopic resection, en bloc resection, or surgery. However, endoscopists often underperform in identifying cancer within these lesions. Studies have reported correct cancer identification rates as low as 20-40%, even among trained endoscopists, contributing to unnecessary surgeries for benign polyps and missed diagnoses in malignant cases.
One contributing factor is the complexity of existing classification systems, which are rarely applied consistently in clinical practice. Simplified tools may improve accuracy and applicability.
The Blink framework, inspired by Malcolm Gladwell's concept of rapid, intuitive decision-making and aligned with Kahneman's System 1 thinking, condenses cancer recognition into six easily observed features of LNPCPs:
Fold deformation Extra redness Chicken skin mucosa Depression Spontaneous bleeding Ulceration
These Blink features can be recognized without advanced imaging and provide a structured, intuitive framework for rapid cancer detection. Previous research has shown that teaching these features improves endoscopists' diagnostic sensitivity. Building on this, the present study evaluates whether a brief Blink-based intervention can improve cancer detection among medical students and non-GI trainees with no prior training in polyp morphology.
Primary Objective:
To assess whether a short educational intervention (2-minute training video on Blink features) improves the sensitivity of medical students and non-GI trainees in detecting cancer in colorectal polyps using static images.
Secondary Objectives
Study Design:
Design: Prospective interventional study with pre- and post-intervention assessments.
Setting: Online survey distributed to medical students and non-GI trainees affiliated with the Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
Intervention: 2-minute video training on the six Blink features, followed by re-assessment of images.
Target Population:
Medical students and non-GI trainees affiliated with the Vrije Universiteit Brussel without prior endoscopy experience.
Sample size: 50-100 participants (yielding 1,000-2,000 individual image evaluations).
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
A brief (2-minute) educational video introducing six Blink features (fold deformation, extra redness, chicken skin mucosa, depression, spontaneous bleeding, ulceration) to improve recognition of colorectal cancer in large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.
Time frame: Immediately before and after the educational intervention (within one online survey session, approximately 15-20 minutes).
Sensitivity will be calculated as the proportion of correctly identified cancerous polyps out of all cancerous polyps presented. Comparison will be made between pre-intervention and post-intervention assessments.
Time frame: Immediately before and after the educational intervention (single online session, ~15-20 minutes).
Specificity: proportion of cancerous polyps correctly identified as cancerous. Compared pre- vs post-intervention using the same participant as their own control.
Time frame: Immediately before and after the educational intervention (same session).
Mean confidence score per case (e.g., 1-5 Likert scale) averaged per participant, compared pre- vs post-intervention.
Time frame: Immediately before and after the educational intervention (same session).
Agreement among participants on cancer vs non-cancer classification, computed as Fleiss' kappa and compared pre- vs post-intervention
Time frame: Baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the educational intervention (within the same online survey session, ~15-20 minutes).
For each endoscopic image, participants will indicate the presence or absence of predefined Blink features (fold deformation, extra redness, chicken skin mucosa, depression, spontaneous bleeding, ulceration). Each feature will be analyzed separately. The presence of each feature will be correlated with diagnostic accuracy, defined as the proportion (%) of correct classifications (cancer vs non-cancer) across participants, using histology as the reference standard.
Measurement Tool: Online survey with image annotation for Blink features and classification task for cancer vs non-cancer.
Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r) between presence/absence of each Blink feature and diagnostic accuracy (%).
Time frame: Immediately after the educational intervention (within the same online survey session, ~15-20 minutes).
For each image, participants will indicate the presence or absence of predefined Blink features (fold deformation, extra redness, chicken skin mucosa, depression, spontaneous bleeding, ulceration). The per-image/per-participant count of features identified will then be correlated with diagnostic accuracy (% of correct cancer vs non-cancer classifications).
Measurement Tool: Online survey with image annotation for Blink features and classification task for cancer vs non-cancer (histology as reference standard).
Unit of Measure: Correlation coefficient (r) between number of Blink features identified and diagnostic accuracy (%).
Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel
Other
Assessment of Blink Impression for Cancer Detection in Colorectal Polyps Among Medical Students and Non-GI Trainees: A Pre-Post Intervention Study
Acronym: Blink
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06411756
Behavior, Colonic Diseases
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06370949
Colonic Diseases, Colorectal Cancer
Ankara, Cankaya, Turkey (Türkiye)
View Trial DetailsNCT05185947
Abdominal Neoplasms, Adenocarcinoma
Bethesda, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07563816
Adenoma, Adenomatous Polyps
Hořovice, Czechia
View Trial Details