Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

One-fourth of colorectal neoplasia are missed at screening colonoscopy, representing the main cause of interval colorectal cancer. Deep learning systems with real-time computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) showed high accuracy in artificial settings, and preliminary randomized controlled trials (RCT...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2021-01, Vol.93 (1), p.77-85.e6
Hauptverfasser: Hassan, Cesare, Spadaccini, Marco, Iannone, Andrea, Maselli, Roberta, Jovani, Manol, Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva, Antonelli, Giulio, Yu, Honggang, Areia, Miguel, Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario, Bhandari, Pradeep, Sharma, Prateek, Rex, Douglas K., Rösch, Thomas, Wallace, Michael, Repici, Alessandro
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 85.e6
container_issue 1
container_start_page 77
container_title Gastrointestinal endoscopy
container_volume 93
creator Hassan, Cesare
Spadaccini, Marco
Iannone, Andrea
Maselli, Roberta
Jovani, Manol
Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva
Antonelli, Giulio
Yu, Honggang
Areia, Miguel
Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario
Bhandari, Pradeep
Sharma, Prateek
Rex, Douglas K.
Rösch, Thomas
Wallace, Michael
Repici, Alessandro
description One-fourth of colorectal neoplasia are missed at screening colonoscopy, representing the main cause of interval colorectal cancer. Deep learning systems with real-time computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) showed high accuracy in artificial settings, and preliminary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported favorable outcomes in the clinical setting. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize available RCTs on the performance of CADe systems in colorectal neoplasia detection. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases until March 2020 for RCTs reporting diagnostic accuracy of CADe systems in the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The primary outcome was pooled adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) according to size, morphology, and location; advanced APC; polyp detection rate; polyps per colonoscopy; and sessile serrated lesions per colonoscopy. We calculated risk ratios (RRs), performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and assessed heterogeneity and publication bias. Overall, 5 randomized controlled trials (4354 patients) were included in the final analysis. Pooled ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (791/2163 [36.6%] vs 558/2191 [25.2%]; RR, 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.62; P < .01; I2 = 42%). APC was also higher in the CADe group compared with control (1249/2163 [.58] vs 779/2191 [.36]; RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.53-1.89; P < .01; I2 = 33%). APC was higher for ≤5-mm (RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.48-1.84), 6- to 9-mm (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.19-1.75), and ≥10-mm adenomas (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-2.06) and for proximal (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34-1.88), distal (RR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.50-1.88), flat (RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.47-2.15), and polypoid morphology (RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.40-1.68). Regarding histology, CADe resulted in a higher sessile serrated lesion per colonoscopy (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.02), whereas a nonsignificant trend for advanced ADR was found (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, .74-2.47; P = .33; I2 = 69%). Level of evidence for RCTs was graded as moderate. According to available evidence, the incorporation of artificial intelligence as aid for detection of colorectal neoplasia results in a significant increase in the detection of colorectal neoplasia, and such effect is independent from main adenoma characteristics. [Display omitted]
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2419093769</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0016510720345235</els_id><sourcerecordid>2419093769</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-ddc37516f9342af466286dcfd7fb824754757421ee70f910f5fdf1301a845aee3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFu1DAQhi1ERbeFB-CCfOSSMHYSO4YTqlqKVKkc4Gy59rjyKomD7QVF4uHxsoUj0khzmO__pfkIec2gZcDEu337GLDlwKEF0cKgnpEdAyUbIaV6TnZQoWZgIM_JRc57ABh5x16Q844PalSi25FfXzD5mGazWKTRU5NK8MEGM9GwFJym8IjHU1iojVNcYrZx3WiNUONwibOhZnF0jdO2UocFbQlxeU8NzVsuOJsSLE34I-DPP-CMxTRmMdOWQ35JzryZMr562pfk283116vb5u7-0-erj3eN7QUvjXO2kwMTXnU9N74Xgo_CWe-kfxh5L4c6sucMUYJXDPzgnWcdMDP2g0HsLsnbU--a4vcD5qLnkG19ziwYD1nznilQnRSqouyE2hRzTuj1msJs0qYZ6KN0vddVuj5K1yB0lV4zb57qDw8zun-Jv5Yr8OEEYH2yqkg623DU6kKqwrSL4T_1vwF9ZZRp</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2419093769</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Hassan, Cesare ; Spadaccini, Marco ; Iannone, Andrea ; Maselli, Roberta ; Jovani, Manol ; Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva ; Antonelli, Giulio ; Yu, Honggang ; Areia, Miguel ; Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario ; Bhandari, Pradeep ; Sharma, Prateek ; Rex, Douglas K. ; Rösch, Thomas ; Wallace, Michael ; Repici, Alessandro</creator><creatorcontrib>Hassan, Cesare ; Spadaccini, Marco ; Iannone, Andrea ; Maselli, Roberta ; Jovani, Manol ; Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva ; Antonelli, Giulio ; Yu, Honggang ; Areia, Miguel ; Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario ; Bhandari, Pradeep ; Sharma, Prateek ; Rex, Douglas K. ; Rösch, Thomas ; Wallace, Michael ; Repici, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><description>One-fourth of colorectal neoplasia are missed at screening colonoscopy, representing the main cause of interval colorectal cancer. Deep learning systems with real-time computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) showed high accuracy in artificial settings, and preliminary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported favorable outcomes in the clinical setting. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize available RCTs on the performance of CADe systems in colorectal neoplasia detection. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases until March 2020 for RCTs reporting diagnostic accuracy of CADe systems in the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The primary outcome was pooled adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) according to size, morphology, and location; advanced APC; polyp detection rate; polyps per colonoscopy; and sessile serrated lesions per colonoscopy. We calculated risk ratios (RRs), performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and assessed heterogeneity and publication bias. Overall, 5 randomized controlled trials (4354 patients) were included in the final analysis. Pooled ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (791/2163 [36.6%] vs 558/2191 [25.2%]; RR, 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.62; P &lt; .01; I2 = 42%). APC was also higher in the CADe group compared with control (1249/2163 [.58] vs 779/2191 [.36]; RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.53-1.89; P &lt; .01; I2 = 33%). APC was higher for ≤5-mm (RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.48-1.84), 6- to 9-mm (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.19-1.75), and ≥10-mm adenomas (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-2.06) and for proximal (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34-1.88), distal (RR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.50-1.88), flat (RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.47-2.15), and polypoid morphology (RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.40-1.68). Regarding histology, CADe resulted in a higher sessile serrated lesion per colonoscopy (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.02), whereas a nonsignificant trend for advanced ADR was found (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, .74-2.47; P = .33; I2 = 69%). Level of evidence for RCTs was graded as moderate. According to available evidence, the incorporation of artificial intelligence as aid for detection of colorectal neoplasia results in a significant increase in the detection of colorectal neoplasia, and such effect is independent from main adenoma characteristics. [Display omitted]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-5107</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6779</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32598963</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><ispartof>Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2021-01, Vol.93 (1), p.77-85.e6</ispartof><rights>2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-ddc37516f9342af466286dcfd7fb824754757421ee70f910f5fdf1301a845aee3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-ddc37516f9342af466286dcfd7fb824754757421ee70f910f5fdf1301a845aee3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016510720345235$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32598963$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hassan, Cesare</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spadaccini, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iannone, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maselli, Roberta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jovani, Manol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Antonelli, Giulio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Honggang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Areia, Miguel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhandari, Pradeep</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Prateek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rex, Douglas K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rösch, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallace, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Repici, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><title>Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</title><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><description>One-fourth of colorectal neoplasia are missed at screening colonoscopy, representing the main cause of interval colorectal cancer. Deep learning systems with real-time computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) showed high accuracy in artificial settings, and preliminary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported favorable outcomes in the clinical setting. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize available RCTs on the performance of CADe systems in colorectal neoplasia detection. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases until March 2020 for RCTs reporting diagnostic accuracy of CADe systems in the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The primary outcome was pooled adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) according to size, morphology, and location; advanced APC; polyp detection rate; polyps per colonoscopy; and sessile serrated lesions per colonoscopy. We calculated risk ratios (RRs), performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and assessed heterogeneity and publication bias. Overall, 5 randomized controlled trials (4354 patients) were included in the final analysis. Pooled ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (791/2163 [36.6%] vs 558/2191 [25.2%]; RR, 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.62; P &lt; .01; I2 = 42%). APC was also higher in the CADe group compared with control (1249/2163 [.58] vs 779/2191 [.36]; RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.53-1.89; P &lt; .01; I2 = 33%). APC was higher for ≤5-mm (RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.48-1.84), 6- to 9-mm (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.19-1.75), and ≥10-mm adenomas (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-2.06) and for proximal (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34-1.88), distal (RR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.50-1.88), flat (RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.47-2.15), and polypoid morphology (RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.40-1.68). Regarding histology, CADe resulted in a higher sessile serrated lesion per colonoscopy (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.02), whereas a nonsignificant trend for advanced ADR was found (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, .74-2.47; P = .33; I2 = 69%). Level of evidence for RCTs was graded as moderate. According to available evidence, the incorporation of artificial intelligence as aid for detection of colorectal neoplasia results in a significant increase in the detection of colorectal neoplasia, and such effect is independent from main adenoma characteristics. [Display omitted]</description><issn>0016-5107</issn><issn>1097-6779</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMFu1DAQhi1ERbeFB-CCfOSSMHYSO4YTqlqKVKkc4Gy59rjyKomD7QVF4uHxsoUj0khzmO__pfkIec2gZcDEu337GLDlwKEF0cKgnpEdAyUbIaV6TnZQoWZgIM_JRc57ABh5x16Q844PalSi25FfXzD5mGazWKTRU5NK8MEGM9GwFJym8IjHU1iojVNcYrZx3WiNUONwibOhZnF0jdO2UocFbQlxeU8NzVsuOJsSLE34I-DPP-CMxTRmMdOWQ35JzryZMr562pfk283116vb5u7-0-erj3eN7QUvjXO2kwMTXnU9N74Xgo_CWe-kfxh5L4c6sucMUYJXDPzgnWcdMDP2g0HsLsnbU--a4vcD5qLnkG19ziwYD1nznilQnRSqouyE2hRzTuj1msJs0qYZ6KN0vddVuj5K1yB0lV4zb57qDw8zun-Jv5Yr8OEEYH2yqkg623DU6kKqwrSL4T_1vwF9ZZRp</recordid><startdate>202101</startdate><enddate>202101</enddate><creator>Hassan, Cesare</creator><creator>Spadaccini, Marco</creator><creator>Iannone, Andrea</creator><creator>Maselli, Roberta</creator><creator>Jovani, Manol</creator><creator>Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva</creator><creator>Antonelli, Giulio</creator><creator>Yu, Honggang</creator><creator>Areia, Miguel</creator><creator>Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario</creator><creator>Bhandari, Pradeep</creator><creator>Sharma, Prateek</creator><creator>Rex, Douglas K.</creator><creator>Rösch, Thomas</creator><creator>Wallace, Michael</creator><creator>Repici, Alessandro</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202101</creationdate><title>Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Hassan, Cesare ; Spadaccini, Marco ; Iannone, Andrea ; Maselli, Roberta ; Jovani, Manol ; Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva ; Antonelli, Giulio ; Yu, Honggang ; Areia, Miguel ; Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario ; Bhandari, Pradeep ; Sharma, Prateek ; Rex, Douglas K. ; Rösch, Thomas ; Wallace, Michael ; Repici, Alessandro</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-ddc37516f9342af466286dcfd7fb824754757421ee70f910f5fdf1301a845aee3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hassan, Cesare</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spadaccini, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iannone, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maselli, Roberta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jovani, Manol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Antonelli, Giulio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Honggang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Areia, Miguel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhandari, Pradeep</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Prateek</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rex, Douglas K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rösch, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallace, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Repici, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hassan, Cesare</au><au>Spadaccini, Marco</au><au>Iannone, Andrea</au><au>Maselli, Roberta</au><au>Jovani, Manol</au><au>Chandrasekar, Viveksandeep Thoguluva</au><au>Antonelli, Giulio</au><au>Yu, Honggang</au><au>Areia, Miguel</au><au>Dinis-Ribeiro, Mario</au><au>Bhandari, Pradeep</au><au>Sharma, Prateek</au><au>Rex, Douglas K.</au><au>Rösch, Thomas</au><au>Wallace, Michael</au><au>Repici, Alessandro</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Gastrointestinal endoscopy</jtitle><addtitle>Gastrointest Endosc</addtitle><date>2021-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>93</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>77</spage><epage>85.e6</epage><pages>77-85.e6</pages><issn>0016-5107</issn><eissn>1097-6779</eissn><abstract>One-fourth of colorectal neoplasia are missed at screening colonoscopy, representing the main cause of interval colorectal cancer. Deep learning systems with real-time computer-aided polyp detection (CADe) showed high accuracy in artificial settings, and preliminary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported favorable outcomes in the clinical setting. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize available RCTs on the performance of CADe systems in colorectal neoplasia detection. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases until March 2020 for RCTs reporting diagnostic accuracy of CADe systems in the detection of colorectal neoplasia. The primary outcome was pooled adenoma detection rate (ADR), and secondary outcomes were adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) according to size, morphology, and location; advanced APC; polyp detection rate; polyps per colonoscopy; and sessile serrated lesions per colonoscopy. We calculated risk ratios (RRs), performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses, and assessed heterogeneity and publication bias. Overall, 5 randomized controlled trials (4354 patients) were included in the final analysis. Pooled ADR was significantly higher in the CADe group than in the control group (791/2163 [36.6%] vs 558/2191 [25.2%]; RR, 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.62; P &lt; .01; I2 = 42%). APC was also higher in the CADe group compared with control (1249/2163 [.58] vs 779/2191 [.36]; RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.53-1.89; P &lt; .01; I2 = 33%). APC was higher for ≤5-mm (RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.48-1.84), 6- to 9-mm (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.19-1.75), and ≥10-mm adenomas (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-2.06) and for proximal (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34-1.88), distal (RR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.50-1.88), flat (RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.47-2.15), and polypoid morphology (RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.40-1.68). Regarding histology, CADe resulted in a higher sessile serrated lesion per colonoscopy (RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.14-2.02), whereas a nonsignificant trend for advanced ADR was found (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, .74-2.47; P = .33; I2 = 69%). Level of evidence for RCTs was graded as moderate. According to available evidence, the incorporation of artificial intelligence as aid for detection of colorectal neoplasia results in a significant increase in the detection of colorectal neoplasia, and such effect is independent from main adenoma characteristics. [Display omitted]</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>32598963</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0016-5107
ispartof Gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2021-01, Vol.93 (1), p.77-85.e6
issn 0016-5107
1097-6779
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2419093769
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
title Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T09%3A39%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20of%20artificial%20intelligence%20in%20colonoscopy%20for%20adenoma%20and%20polyp%20detection:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Gastrointestinal%20endoscopy&rft.au=Hassan,%20Cesare&rft.date=2021-01&rft.volume=93&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=77&rft.epage=85.e6&rft.pages=77-85.e6&rft.issn=0016-5107&rft.eissn=1097-6779&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2419093769%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2419093769&rft_id=info:pmid/32598963&rft_els_id=S0016510720345235&rfr_iscdi=true