ArticlePituitary2024
Shared decision-making and detection of comorbidities in an online acromegaly consultation with and without the Acromegaly Disease Activity Tool ACRODAT
Article in Pituitary, 2024. 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.
- Recent progress in the understanding of psychological complications of acromegaly: toward a longitudinal clinical phenotype.Pituitary · 2026Review
- SAGITPituitary · 2025Article
- ACRODAT and SAGIT for the assessment of disease activity in acromegaly: a multicenter study of the Veneto region in Italy.Pituitary · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA patient-centered approach to the management of acromegaly includes disease activity control, shared decision-making and identification of comorbidities. The Acromegaly Disease Activity Tool (ACRODAT
methodsWe studied patient-doctor interaction via online video consultation in a randomized prospective study design with SPs trained to simulate a specific acromegaly profile. We analyzed the proportion of conversation time devoted to health content and the specific acromegaly and comorbidity relevant categories mentioned in the conversation. We collected physicians' feedback on the usefulness of ACRODAT
resultsThe sample (N = 30) consisted of endocrinologists treating patients with acromegaly in Germany. For SP-physician interactions (N = 60), the proportion of time spent on conversation content (e.g. IGF-I, quality of life) was distributed according to the focus of the patient profile. Comorbidities were less well identified than the need for a change in therapy. Only 18.3% of the SPs were actively asked to participate in the decision-making process. ACRODAT
conclusionsShared decision-making was underrepresented in this SP-physician interaction in acromegaly management. Physicians adapted the content of the discussion to the SP's needs, but did not adequately address comorbidities. According to the analysis criteria used, ACRODAT
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.