Clinical Evidence Library

Clinical Evidence Library  

Clinical evidence from guidelines, trials, biomedical literature, regulator material, and evidence reviews.

PCOS guidelines: what changed from 2018 to 2023?. Walk readers through the shift from 2018 to 2023 as refinement rather than reversal. Emphasize streamlined diagnosis, AMH as an adult-only ultrasound alternative, broader cardiometabolic and psychological risk recognition, and the continued low-to-moderate evidence base.

Did the 2023 PCOS guideline change everything? Not really. It builds on 2018 with the same evidence-based core, just a cleaner diagnostic pathway and broader recognition of what PCOS affects[[cite:1]]. The biggest diagnostic shift is refinement: adults still use the established framework, but 2023 s...

View

Can AI safely accelerate evidence synthesis?. Build a knowledge-check quiz around what AI tools can and cannot reliably do in systematic review workflows and evidence-disagreement detection. Include items on screening, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, human validation, selective reporting, and fine-grained population extraction failures.

Q1. According to the systematic review, which task did AI methods appear to be used for most often in evidence synthesis workflows? - Study screening - Data extraction - Risk-of-bias assessment - Selective reporting detection Answer: Study screening[[cite:1]] Q2. What did the review say about the re...

View

When do systematic reviews miss harms?. Narrate why adverse events may be underdetected when reviews rely on randomized trials alone. Explain the need to combine trial data with post-marketing surveillance, spontaneous reports, epidemiology, and unpublished evidence while pre-specifying harms and follow-up.

When systematic reviews of semaglutide or tirzepatide rely on randomized trials alone, they can miss important harms. The trials may include too few people to detect rare adverse events, and they may end before delayed harms appear. Published trial reports can also leave out a lot of adverse event i...

View

How well do you know the GLP-1 weight-loss evidence?. Design a short educational quiz around comparative efficacy, heterogeneity of treatment effects, gastrointestinal tolerability, absence of head-to-head trials, and limits of long-term evidence. Use answer feedback to reinforce study-design caveats rather than offering clinical advice.

Q1. In the reviewed evidence, which drug generally produced greater average weight loss? - Semaglutide - Tirzepatide - Exenatide - Liraglutide Answer: Tirzepatide[[cite:1]][[cite:2]] Q2. Which study-design issue most strongly limits confidence in the semaglutide versus tirzepatide comparison? - The ...

View

Fast facts on ClinicalTrials.gov results quality. Build five cards around the strongest quantitative and interpretive findings: 79,413 registry records, 2,178 posted results records, 20 percent with more than two primary outcomes, 61 percent lacking specificity in planned analysis metric, and the self reported nature of the data. Frame the deck as historical quality signals rather than current registry performance.

This is a retrospective look at registry quality signals in ClinicalTrials.gov, not a report of current performance. The registry-record analysis examined 79,413 ClinicalTrials.gov records. In the planned-analysis sample, 61% of first primary outcome entries were too vague to identify a measurement ...

View
  • 1(current)