SynthesisEndocrine2021
Are American follow-up recommendations in endocrinology actionable? A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.
Synthesis in Endocrine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interplay Between Infectious Diseases and the Endocrine System: An Overview and Clinical Insights.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeClinical guidelines include recommendations to guide patient's longitudinal care. These recommendations may differ in content and quality of supporting evidence from those guiding diagnosis and treatment. We aimed to identify recommendations guiding the follow-up of patients with endocrine conditions, describe their content and quality of evidence.
methodsWe systematically assessed the Endocrine Society and the American Thyroid Association clinical guidelines and identified recommendations guiding follow-up strategies to evaluate direction, content, strength, and quality of evidence.
resultsOut of 1540 recommendations, 138(8.9%) guided follow-up strategies. From these, 109 (79%) recommendations included goal of follow-up, 121(97.7%) suggested follow-up methods, and 56 (40.6%) a specific monitoring frequency. A total of 76 (55.1%) assessed treatment response, 65 (47.1%) disease progression, and 30 (21.7%) side effects. A total of 90 (65.2%) described the use of laboratory studies, 30 (21.7%) clinical exam/history, and 27 (19.6%) imaging studies. Finally, 91 (65.9%) suggested a monitoring time interval and 42 (30.4%) directed an action based on results. Most recommendations [88 (55.3%)] were based on low/very low-quality evidence. A total of 73 (52.9%) recommendations were labeled as strong, from which 12% were based on high-quality evidence.
conclusionsOne out of ten clinical recommendations for endocrine conditions guide follow-up and their content is variable. More than half of the follow-up recommendations are supported by low/very low-quality evidence and the majority does not provide an action threshold. A specific framework for developing follow-up recommendations can aid guideline panelists and support evidence-based monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.