Full Liquid Diet Versus Clear Liquid Diet and Sodium Sulfate Solution for Colonoscopy Preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Diet and the prep medication affect the quality of colonoscopy examinations. The most widely accepted clear liquid diet does not leave patients with many options, and can be especially difficult for the diabetic population. This study compares prep quality between full liquid diet (FLD) and a clear liquid diet (CLD) in the setting of a split dosing sodium sulfate solution. Methods: This was a single-blinded, prospective, randomized study in a single community setting that included 160 patients who underwent elective outpatient colonoscopy for colon cancer screening or surveillance. Patients were randomized to either the standard of care CLD or the FLD which allowed patients to consume milk, ice cream, pudding, sorbet and sherbet but avoided red or purple coloring. Both groups received sodium sulfate as the prep solution. A sample size of 80 patients per group was needed to have approximately 80% power to detect a 15% difference between the two groups. The X2 Test of Independence was used to compare differences between the groups on the categorical variables and analysis of variance was used to compare differences between continuous variables. The primary outcome was the mean difference on the Ottawa Bowel Preparation scale between the two groups. Results: Of the 160 patients enrolled, 159 were randomized. 58% of the patients were female. The most common indication for the exam was average risk screening (72.5%), followed by personal history of polyp (21.3%), family history of colon cancer (5%), and family history of colon polyp (0.6%). 81 patients were enrolled in the CLD group and 78 patients in the FLD group. There was no difference in the mean Ottawa score between the CLD and FLD, 2.68 and 2.53, respectively (P = 0.653). Overall, the prep process was well-tolerated with the exception of more headache complaints in the FLD group. The overall cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate and average withdraw time were 99.4%, 49.6% and 10.2 minutes, respectively. Conclusion: This non-inferior result adds to the increase in literature demonstrating a strict CLD may not be necessary for a colonoscopy exam. Endoscopists should be more confident in having greater latitude in the prep diet. This, in return, may also improve the willingness of the patients to complete such an exam.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".