ArticleClinical endocrinology2026
Patients With Pituitary Neuroendocrine Tumours Requiring Neurosurgery -Who Is Referring Them?
Article in Clinical endocrinology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePatients living with pituitary neuroendocrine tumours (PitNETs) present with a spectrum of clinical manifestations and often follow a circuitous route to diagnosis, resulting in diagnostic delays. The objective of this study is to identify and report the various sources of referrals for patients who underwent pituitary resection for PitNETs in a tertiary referral centre for pituitary disease.
designRetrospective population-based cohort study. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing a first surgery for management of PitNET in Northern Ireland between 01/01/2000-19/07/2019. MEASUREMENTS: Demographics, referral sources, incidentaloma rates, apoplexy rates, symptoms, age at diagnosis and diagnostic delay according to referral source.
resultsData were retrospectively analysed for 520 patients in whom the referral source leading to diagnosis was known. Fifty-seven percent of patients were male. Median age at diagnosis was 54 years (range 18-85). Patients were referred from 29 different sources. The majority of referrals came from general practice (23%), ophthalmology (14%), emergency medicine (9%), optician/optometry (9%) and internists (8%). Twenty-nine patients were referred following radiological discovery of an incidentaloma. Twenty-seven patients were referred with an initial presentation of pituitary apoplexy, with emergency medicine accounting for 70% of these referrals. Visual disturbance and headache were the most frequently documented symptoms. Median diagnostic delay was 2 years (range 0-25 years).
conclusionsPatients with PitNETs encounter a range of clinical services in their journey to pituitary surgery. Raising awareness of these tumours and educating healthcare professionals across all disciplines could reduce diagnostic delays, thereby minimising the adverse sequelae of delayed diagnosis.
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.