ReviewFrontiers in endocrinology2022
The promising role of risk scoring system for Cushing syndrome: Time to reconsider current screening recommendations.
Review in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of clinical screening systems for Cushing disease in the United States.Pituitary · 2025Article
- "Who and how to screen for endogenous hypercortisolism among young women presenting with clinical hyperandrogenism and/or menstrual abnormalities ".Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2025Review
- Emerging diagnostic methods and imaging modalities in cushing's syndrome.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the current screening approach for Cushing syndrome (CS), delayed diagnosis is common due to broad spectrum of presentation, poor discriminant symptoms featured in diabetes and obesity, and low clinical index of suspicion. Even if initial tests are recommended to screen CS, divergent results are not infrequent. As global prevalence of type 2 diabetes and obesity increases, CS may not be frequent enough to back routine screening to avoid false-positive results. This represents a greater challenge in countries with limited health resources. The development of indexes incorporates clinical features and biochemical data that are largely used to provide a tool to predict the presence of disease. In clinical endocrinology, indexes have been used in Graves' ophthalmology, hirsutism, and hypothyroidism. The use of clinical risk scoring system may assist clinicians in discriminating CS in the context of at-risk populations and, thus, may provide a potential intervention to decrease time to diagnosis. Development and validation of clinical model to estimate pre-test probability of CS in different geographic source population may help to establish regional prediction model for CS. Here, we review on the latest progress in clinical risk scoring system for CS and attempt to raise awareness for the use, validation, and/or development of clinical risk scores in CS.
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.