A Survey of American Thyroid Association Members Regarding the 2015 Adult Thyroid Nodule and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The 2015 American Thyroid Association (ATA) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on management of thyroid nodules (TNs) and differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) in adults were developed to inform clinicians, patients, researchers, and health policy makers about the best available evidence, and its limitations, relating to management of these conditions. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional electronic survey of ATA members' perspectives of these CPGs, using a standardized survey (Clinician Guidelines Determinant Questionnaire) developed by the Guidelines International Network. A survey link was electronically mailed to members in February of 2019, with reminders sent to nonrespondents 2 and 5 weeks later. Data were descriptively summarized, after excluding missing responses. Results: The overall response rate was 19.8% (348/1761). The effective response rate was 20.2% (348/1720), after excluding a recently deceased member and individuals who had either invalid e-mail addresses or whose e-mails were returned. Of the respondents, 37.9% (132/348) were female, 60.4% (209/346) were endocrinologists, 27.5% (95/346) were surgeons, and 3.5% (12/346) were nuclear medicine specialists. The majority of respondents (71.9%; 250/348) were at a mid- or advanced-career level, and more than half were in academia (57.5%; 195/339). The majority (69.8%; 243/348) practiced in North America. The vast majority of respondents indicated that the CPGs explained the underlying evidence (92.3%; 298/323) and 92.9% (300/323) agreed or strongly agreed with the content. Most respondents stated that they regularly used the CPGs in their practice (83.0%; 268/323). Most respondents (83.0%; 268/323) also agreed or strongly agreed that the recommendations were easy to incorporate in their practice. The most popular CPG format was an electronic desktop file (78.8%; 252/320). Shorter more frequent CPGs were favored by 55.0% (176/320) of respondents, and longer traditional CPGs were favored by 39.7% (127/320). Conclusions: The clinical content and evidence explanations in the adult TN and DTC CPGs are widely accepted and applied among ATA survey respondents. Future ATA CPG updates need to be optimized to best meet users' preferences regarding format, frequency, and length.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».