ReviewHNO2026
[Ultrasound in secondary prevention of thyroid nodules-evidence, benefits, and limitations].
Review in HNO, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThyroid nodules are common incidental findings in ultrasound examinations. Early detection by ultrasound does not seem to have any patient-relevant benefits in terms of secondary prevention.
objectiveThe current article provides an overview of international evidence for the benefits and harms of ultrasound in the secondary prevention of thyroid nodules.
methodsA narrative review (PubMed search; 2010-2025) of guidelines (American Thyroid Association, ATA; American Association of Clinical Endocrinology, AACE/American College of Endocrinology, ACE; European Thyroid Association, ETA; United States Preventive Services Task Force, USPSTF; National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, NICE; German-language S3 guidelines), population-based studies (SHIP, KORA, SEER), and systematic reviews and meta-analyses was performed.
resultsThe prevalence of thyroid nodules is high, but the proportion of clinically relevant or malignant findings is very low. Mortality from thyroid cancer is also low. Screening asymptomatic adults with ultrasound increases the incidence of mostly indolent papillary carcinomas without any reduction in mortality. The risk of overdiagnosis and subsequent overtreatment is substantial. Thus, international and national guidelines do not recommend screening for early detection of thyroid cancer. Standardized ultrasound risk classifications (e.g., European Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System, EU-TIRADS/American College of Radiology TIRADS, ACR TIRADS) are essential for targeted evaluation in cases of clinically suspected thyroid cancer.
conclusionScreening asymptomatic individuals using ultrasound is not recommended. The rate of overdiagnosis is high, and the benefits in terms of reducing morbidity or mortality have not been proven.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41467911What 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.