Evaluation of Characteristics in Children and Adolescents with Hashimoto Thyroiditis in Euthyroid and Hypothyroid Phases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the different characteristics of Hashimoto thyroiditis (HT) in children and adolescents in euthyroid and hypothyroid phases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Literature search was conducted in 2024 with sources from MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, EBSCO-Host, ProQuest, and Google Scholar databases. Cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies that examined the evaluation of characteristics in children and adolescents diagnosed with HT both in euthyroid and hypothyroid phases were included. The key terms for the literature search were a combination of "clinical," "laboratory," "characteristics," "autoimmune thyroid," "hashimoto thyroiditis," "children," and "adolescents." The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was utilized for quality assessment of the included studies and Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration; London, United Kingdom) to perform the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The hypothyroid phase was significantly younger (mean difference = -0.67 years; 95% CI: -1.29, -0.04; P=.04) and showed higher rates of constipation (risk ratio [RR] = 3.76; 95% CI: 1.96-7.21; P < .0001) and weight gain (RR = 2.94; 95% CI: 1.46-5.90; P=.002). Laboratory findings showed significantly elevated thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) (P=.0001), lower free thyroxine (FT4) (P=.0001), and higher thyroid peroxidase antibodies (TPOAbs) (P=.05). No significant differences were observed in sex, BMI (body mass index), or other clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The hypothyroid phase exhibited younger age, higher rates of constipation and weight gain, and distinct laboratory profiles compared to the euthyroid phase.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.042 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".