Guevara, Kerly

Abstract Context Incidental thyroid findings (ITFs) are increasingly detected on imaging performed for non-thyroid indications. Their prevalence, features, and consequences remain undefined. Objective To develop, validate, and deploy a natural language processing (NLP) pipeline to identify ITFs in radiology reports and assess their prevalence, features, and clinical outcomes. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Mayo Clinic sites (Rochester, Arizona, Florida, Mayo Clinic Health System). Participants Adults without prior thyroid disease undergoing thyroid-capturing imaging from July 1, 2017, to September 30, 2023. A transformer-based NLP pipeline identified ITFs and extracted nodule characteristics from image reports from multiple modalities and body regions. Outcomes ITF prevalence, downstream thyroid ultrasound, biopsy, thyroidectomy, and cancer diagnosis. Logistic regression identified demographic and imaging-related factors. Results Among 115 683 patients (mean age, 56.8 [SD 17.2]; 52.9% women), 9077 (7.8%) had an ITF (92.9% nodular). ITFs were more likely in women, older adults, higher BMI, and in imaging ordered by specialties different from Emergency Medicine. Compared with chest CT, ITFs were more likely via neck CT, PET, and nuclear medicine scans. Nodule characteristics were poorly documented, with size reported in 44% and other features in fewer than 15%. Compared with patients without ITFs, those with ITFs had higher odds of thyroid nodule diagnosis (OR 45, 95%CI 41.1-49.3), biopsy (OR 46.8, 95%CI 39.0-56.2) thyroidectomy (OR 55.8, 95%CI 31.3-99.3), and thyroid cancer diagnosis (OR 61.7, 95%CI 38.6-98.5). Most cancers were papillary (88.5%) and larger when detected after ITFs (2 cm SD 1.4) vs no ITF (1.3 cm SD 0.8). Conclusion ITFs were common and strongly associated with cascades leading to the detection of small, low-risk cancers, highlighting their role in overdiagnosis and the need for standardized reporting and more selective follow-up.

Abstract Background The self-management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) typically requires enacting various lifestyle changes, which can challenge people living with T2D. Clinical encounters between people with T2D and their clinicians, however, are often focused on metabolic management, leaving less time available for other self-management topics. The QBSAFE cards help patients articulate aspects of their experience with diabetes and prioritize issues for discussion. Methods This report details secondary outcomes of a randomized controlled trial; primary outcomes are reported elsewhere. All data was collected at Fair Haven Community Health Care, a federally qualified primary care clinic. 11 clinicians were randomly assigned to provide either usual care or usual care with QBSAFE cards to 155 of their patients with type 2 diabetes and hemoglobin A1c >8%. All patient encounters were video recorded for analysis. Patients and clinicians were not blinded to arm allocation but were kept unaware of the specific aims of the trial. Encounter video reviewers were blinded to arm allocation, but not to specific aims of the trial. The outcomes of interest for this report were the extent to which the QBSAFE cards were used as intended, their effect on the topics of discussion, and whether they enabled clinicians to notice and respond to each patient’s situation; comparisons between arms were conducted by a linear mixed model with fixed effect of arm and cluster effect of clinician, analyzed in both intent-to-treat and per-protocol populations. Findings 12 patients were excluded post-randomization (A1c <8%). Of 143 eligible patients, 137 encounters (65 in the usual care arm, 72 in QBSAFE) yielded evaluable videos. QBSAFE was used as intended in 61 (85%) QBSAFE arm encounters. Conversations about burden of treatment related to non-pharmacological interventions (17 vs 33, p = 0·04) and taking medications (11 vs 33, p = 0·0008) and about the patient’s challenging environment (2 vs 10, p = 0·04) were more prevalent in the QBSAFE group. There was no difference in the rate of conversations about metabolic management or of new care plans as a result of conversations between groups. Interpretation While there was a difference in the types of conversations observed between the two study arms, this difference was small and only apparent in a few domains. Future work could aim to modify the QBSAFE cards to more effectively stimulate patient-centered discussions and to further prepare clinicians to respond to a variety of issues raised during the clinical visit. Funding This work was supported by funding from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK129616).

Abstract Purpose Overuse of thyroid ultrasound (TUS) has contributed to rising thyroid cancer diagnoses and is projected to increase US healthcare costs from $1.5 billion to $3.5 billion by 2030. This study evaluated the healthcare cost of inappropriately ordered TUS in a national multicenter academic system. Methods This is a secondary cost analysis of a retrospective cohort study across 4 Mayo Clinic sites (Rochester, MN; Jacksonville, FL; Scottsdale, AZ; and the Midwest Mayo Clinic Health System). Adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing their first TUS between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2021, with at least 1 year of follow-up were included. TUS indications were classified as appropriate or inappropriate using a guideline-based natural language processing algorithm. The primary outcome was a comparison of adjusted 1-year all-cause healthcare costs. A secondary analysis calculated the direct procedural costs of the inappropriate TUS cascade. Results Among 6984 patients (mean age 56 [SD 16.4]; 76.2% female; 90.9% White), 546 (7.8%) underwent TUS for inappropriate indications. These patients were younger (mean age 53.0 vs 56.3 years, P &lt; .0001) but otherwise demographically similar. Adjusted total healthcare costs over 90 days and 1 year were comparable: $4842 vs $5794 and $13 748 vs $14 257 for inappropriate vs appropriate TUS, respectively. The inappropriate TUS cascade, including an estimated 56 subsequent biopsies and 22 thyroidectomies, resulted in a minimum of $576 134 in direct procedural costs. Conclusion While adjusted total costs were similar, inappropriate TUS represents potentially avoidable spending and remains a viable target for cost-reduction strategies. Reducing low-value imaging remains a critical target for cost-saving interventions.

Abstract Background Patients living with diabetes and chronic conditions may face significant burden managing their health. Many of these patients use digital medicine tools such as continuous glucose monitoring systems. Although measures exist to assess treatment burden from tasks such as managing medications and attending healthcare visits, there is no patient-reported measure that captures the burden of digital care. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to validate the Treatment Burden Questionnaire Plus Digital (TBQ + D), a patient-reported measure of treatment burden that includes using digital tools for adults with diabetes. Methods Adult patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus completed the 25-item TBQ + D (scored 0 [none] to 10 [maximum] per item; total score range 0–250). We evaluated ease of administration, internal consistency, and tested hypotheses about the relationship between TBQ + D scores and treatment complexity, digital tool use intensity, social risk factors, and digital comfort to assess TBQ + D’s validity. Results Of 324 patients approached, 300 (93%) consented and completed the TBQ + D (mean age 57 [SD 17]; 50% female; 50% with type 2). The mean TBQ + D score was 53.7 (SD 41.6). Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach’s α = 0.94). As hypothesized, higher TBQ + D scores were reported by patients with type 1 vs. type 2 diabetes mellitus (61.7 vs. 45.7; p = .0008), maximal/moderate vs. minimal to no digital tool use (56.5/60.7 vs. 41.3; p = .001), those on intensive insulin therapy vs. other treatments (61.4 vs. 38.0; p < .0001), and those with greater social vulnerability (p < .0106). TBQ + D scores were not significantly higher in patients with HbA1c ≥ 8% (p = .055) or less comfortable with digital technology (p = .08). Conclusions TBQ + D is a novel and valid measure of treatment burden in patients living with diabetes, inclusive of digital burden, that can play a role in fostering minimally disruptive care for patients with diabetes.

ImportanceThyroid cancer incidence has tripled in the past 3 decades, largely driven by increased detection of small, indolent papillary thyroid cancers. Overuse of thyroid ultrasonography (TUS) contributes to overdiagnosis, leading to unnecessary biopsies, procedures, and potential patient harm.ObjectiveTo evaluate the frequency of and factors associated with inappropriate TUS (iTUS) orders and assess related clinical outcomes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed adult patients 18 years and older who underwent their first TUS from January 1, 2017, to December 30, 2021, at 4 Mayo Clinic sites. Patients with previous thyroid nodule, thyroid cancer, thyroid surgery, or TUS were excluded. Based on documented clinical indications, a validated natural language processing model classified TUS orders as appropriate or inappropriate. Data were analyzed from April 2024 to May 2025.ExposuresBaseline characteristics of patients, clinicians, and clinical encounters investigated for their association with an iTUS order.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of iTUS orders. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with iTUS (sociodemographic, clinical, order-specific, and clinician-related factors) and clinical outcomes following iTUS, including the detection of thyroid nodules, thyroid procedures, and thyroid cancer diagnoses.ResultsOf 11 442 included patients, 8422 (73.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 57.3 (15.8) years with a mean (SD) body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 29.7 (7.0). Among 11 442 TUS orders, 866 (7.6%) were classified as inappropriate. In multivariable analysis, younger age (age of 18 to 54 years vs older than 65 years; odds ratio [OR], 1.86; 95% CI, 1.56-2.22), hyperthyroidism (OR, 9.04; 95% CI, 6.75-12.11), ordering by nonendocrinology specialties (eg, oncology/hematology; OR, 3.43; 95% CI, 2.47-4.76), and orders not linked to an in-person appointment (eg, portal messages; OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 2.08-2.82) were strongly associated with increased odds of iTUS. Compared with appropriate TUS, iTUS led to lower rates of thyroid nodule detection (202 of 866 [23.3%] vs 6885 of 10 576 [65.1%]; OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.14-0.19), biopsies (89 [10.3%] vs 2647 [25.0%]; OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.27-0.43), partial thyroidectomies (14 [1.6%] vs 424 [4.0%]; OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.23-0.67), and confirmed thyroid cancer cases (16 [1.8%] vs 425 [4.0%]; OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.27-0.74).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, approximately 1 in 13 TUS orders were inappropriate. iTUS was more common in younger patients, those with thyroid dysfunction, those not seen in person, and in those referred by nonendocrinology specialties. These findings highlight the need for targeted strategies to optimize TUS use and mitigate overdiagnosis and overtreatment.