The glass podium: Gender representation within the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons (AAES) from 2010 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing numbers of women in surgery, female underrepresentation in surgical societies remains an ongoing issue. We sought to determine the gender composition of presenters at the American Association of Endocrine Surgery annual meetings. METHODS: Utilizing previous meeting data, we collected gender information for presenters from 2010 to 2019, including first/senior author combinations. Awards winners and invited lecturers were also reviewed. We performed binomial testing to analyze proportions of male to female presenters, with significance set at P < .05. Temporal trends were analyzed via linear regression. RESULTS: Fifty-six percent of American Association of Endocrine Surgery fellows and 36% of members are female. Of 354 podium and 477 poster presentations, women were listed less often as first (42.7%, P = .007) and senior (30.6%, P < .0001) podium authors and less often as first (42.8%, P = .002) and senior (29.8%, P < .0001) poster authors. The most common combination of first/senior authors was male-male (43.1%), followed by female-male (26.8%), female-female (16.1%), and male-female (14.0%). Less than 15% of invited lecturers were women, and women represented a minority in nearly all award categories. We observed a positive trend in female first authorship over time (slope = 0.766, 95% confidence interval, 0.70%-2.23%, P = .26) but no change in female senior authorship over time (slope = 0.03348, 95% confidence interval, 1.086%-1.153%, P = .95). CONCLUSION: Women are underrepresented as American Association of Endocrine Surgery presenters and less likely to receive awards or deliver invited lectures. Although female first authorship increased over time, women continued to lag behind men as senior authors and mentors to trainees and junior faculty. Opportunities to improve speaker and awardee representation should be explored.

TEAM(ing): together each achiev(ing) more!

Providing medical care at the highest levels across various reproductive endocrinology and infertility settings necessitates seamless partnership among multiple people with diverse skill sets. In this introductory article for this month's Views and Reviews, the concept of teaming is presented, including the key concepts of collaboration, assembling the right team members, establishing goals, inspiring and empowering others, and encouraging new approaches to optimize outcomes. Following this introduction, thought leaders from diverse reproductive endocrinology and infertility spaces, including clinical, ambulatory surgery, laboratory, and research settings, present their experiences using teaming models to adapt team members' thinking, elevate the quality of scientific productivity, and achieve excellence in both patient care and laboratory and clinical outcomes.

Teaming: learning, competing, and innovating in the world of reproductive medicine.

Healthcare teams must be deliberately cultivated to reach their full potential. Shifting focus from individual performance to a team's collective competence allows for targeted and evidence-based interventions that support teamwork and improve patient outcomes. We reviewed essential concepts drawn from team science and explored the practical applications of teaming. Reproductive endocrinology and infertility healthcare providers play a pivotal role by teaching, modeling, and fostering teaming attitudes and behaviors. Through teaming, we can maximize our teams' ability to learn, innovate, compete with other teams, and thrive in today's healthcare environment.

Macrocalcifications Do Not Alter Malignancy Risk Within the American Thyroid Association Sonographic Pattern System When Present in Non-High Suspicion Thyroid Nodules.

Background: The American Thyroid Association Sonographic Pattern System (ATASPS) depicts five levels of suspicion for malignancy based on the sonographic appearance of a thyroid nodule. However, 3-37% of nodules are non-classifiable when the combination of grayscale findings is not depicted by the ATASPS. The only calcifications included in the ATASPS are in solid hypoechoic high suspicion (HS) nodules and include both microcalcifications and peripheral interrupted calcifications with soft tissue extrusion. Non-hypoechoic nodules with these and other calcification patterns, which we defined as non-high suspicion calcifications (NHSC), are not classifiable by ATASPS. We assessed the effect of assigning an ATASPS risk level to nodules with NHSC based on analysis of their other grayscale features. Methods: A retrospective review of 728 consecutively biopsied nodules was performed. Nodules were classified by ATASPS as HS, intermediate suspicion (IS), low suspicion (LS), or very low suspicion (VLS); other nodules with patterns not described by ATASPS were non-classifiable (NC). If NC was due to NHSC, the nodule was assigned an ATASPS by analysis of grayscale features alone. Cytology and pathology results were correlated with assigned ATASPS level. Results: A NC pattern was observed in 144 of the 728 nodules (20%). Of these, 101/144 (70%) had NHSC and the assigned ATASPS was IS (n = 18), LS (n = 62) and VLS (n = 21). The distribution of cytology diagnoses within this group was similar to classifiable nodules (IS p = 0.13, LS p = 0.55, VLS p = 0.44). The majority of NHSC (n = 92, 91%) were macrocalcifications (large central or linear dystrophic calcifications); however, 9 LS pattern nodules had punctate echogenic foci, possibly representing microcalcifcations, with an estimated cancer prevalence of 19% (vs. 10% for total LS group, p = 0.24). The remaining NC nodules (43/144, 30%) included solid nodules with heterogeneous echogenicity (n = 30) or presence of a complete circumferential rim calcification, limiting further sonographic assessment (n = 13). Malignancy was identified in 11 out of 43 (26%) of these [9/30 (30%) heterogeneous solid and 2/13 (15%) with complete rim calcifications]. Conclusions: Macrocalcifications accounted for the majority of NHSC and these did not alter the expected ATASPS malignancy risk based on grayscale features.

The 2021 European Group on Graves' orbitopathy (EUGOGO) clinical practice guidelines for the medical management of Graves' orbitopathy.

Graves' orbitopathy (GO) is the main extrathyroidal manifestation of Graves' disease (GD). Choice of treatment should be based on the assessment of clinical activity and severity of GO. Early referral to specialized centers is fundamental for most patients with GO. Risk factors include smoking, thyroid dysfunction, high serum level of thyrotropin receptor antibodies, radioactive iodine (RAI) treatment, and hypercholesterolemia. In mild and active GO, control of risk factors, local treatments, and selenium (selenium-deficient areas) are usually sufficient; if RAI treatment is selected to manage GD, low-dose oral prednisone prophylaxis is needed, especially if risk factors coexist. For both active moderate-to-severe and sight-threatening GO, antithyroid drugs are preferred when managing Graves' hyperthyroidism. In moderate-to-severe and active GO i.v. glucocorticoids are more effective and better tolerated than oral glucocorticoids. Based on current evidence and efficacy/safety profile, costs and reimbursement, drug availability, long-term effectiveness, and patient choice after extensive counseling, a combination of i.v. methylprednisolone and mycophenolate sodium is recommended as first-line treatment. A cumulative dose of 4.5 g of i.v. methylprednisolone in 12 weekly infusions is the optimal regimen. Alternatively, higher cumulative doses not exceeding 8 g can be used as monotherapy in most severe cases and constant/inconstant diplopia. Second-line treatments for moderate-to-severe and active GO include (a) the second course of i.v. methylprednisolone (7.5 g) subsequent to careful ophthalmic and biochemical evaluation, (b) oral prednisone/prednisolone combined with either cyclosporine or azathioprine; (c) orbital radiotherapy combined with oral or i.v. glucocorticoids, (d) teprotumumab; (e) rituximab and (f) tocilizumab. Sight-threatening GO is treated with several high single doses of i.v. methylprednisolone per week and, if unresponsive, with urgent orbital decompression. Rehabilitative surgery (orbital decompression, squint, and eyelid surgery) is indicated for inactive residual GO manifestations.

One year of the pandemic - how European endocrinologists responded to the crisis: a statement from the European Society of Endocrinology.

Changes that COVID-19 induced in endocrine daily practice as well as the role of endocrine and metabolic comorbidities in COVID-19 outcomes were among the striking features of this last year. The aim of this statement is to illustrate the major characteristics of the response of European endocrinologists to the pandemic including the disclosure of the endocrine phenotype of COVID-19 with diabetes, obesity and hypovitaminosis D playing a key role in this clinical setting with its huge implication for the prevention and management of the disease. The role of the European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) as a reference point of the endocrine community during the pandemic will also be highlighted, including the refocusing of its educational and advocacy activities.

Perceptions and lessons from web-based interviews for the reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship application cycle.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the experience and perceptions of reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship applicants and program directors (PDs) regarding the current and future use of web-based interviews (WBIs). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Nationwide cohort. PATIENT(S): Reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship applicants and PDs participating in the 2020 application cycle. INTERVENTION(S): Anonymous survey sent to applicants and PDs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Descriptive study evaluating the experience and satisfaction of applicants and PDs with WBIs. RESULT(S): Forty-six percent of applicants and eligible PDs responded to our survey. Most applicants and PDs responded that WBIs were adequate for conveying a sense of a program's strengths, faculty, diversity, clinical training, and research opportunities, but less than half responded that WBIs were adequate in providing a sense of the program's clinical site and facilities. After WBIs, both applicants (73%) and PDs (86%) were able to rank with confidence. The cost of WBIs was significantly lower for both applicants (median: $100) and programs (median: $100) than the costs previously reported for in-person interviews. The applicants interviewed at more programs than they would have if the interviews were on-site, and Zoom was the highest rated platform used. Most applicants and PDs responded that WBIs were an adequate substitute, and that they should continue after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Furthermore, most of the PDs were planning to continue to use WBIs in some capacity. CONCLUSION(S): Both applicants and PDs had favorable experiences with and perceptions of WBIs, and most endorse the continued use of this interview modality. The findings of this study can help guide and optimize future WBI practices.

GLOBAL ENDOCRINOLOGY: Global perspectives in endocrinology: coverage of iodized salt programs and iodine status in 2020.

Iodine deficiency has multiple adverse effects on growth and development. Diets in many countries cannot provide adequate iodine without iodine fortification of salt. In 2020, 124 countries have legislation for mandatory salt iodization and 21 have legislation allowing voluntary iodization. As a result, 88% of the global population uses iodized salt. For population surveys, the urinary iodine concentration (UIC) should be measured and expressed as the median, in µg/L. The quality of available survey data is high: UIC surveys have been done in 152 out of 194 countries in the past 15 years; in 132 countries, the studies were nationally representative. The number of countries with adequate iodine intake has nearly doubled from 67 in 2003 to 118 in 2020. However, 21 countries remain deficient, while 13 countries have excessive intakes, either due to excess groundwater iodine, or over-iodized salt. Iodine programs are reaching the poorest of the poor: of the 15 poorest countries in the world, 10 are iodine sufficient and only 3 (Burundi, Mozambique and Madagascar) remain mild-to-moderately deficient. Nigeria and India have unstable food systems and millions of malnourished children, but both are iodine-sufficient and population coverage with iodized salt is a remarkable 93% in both. Once entrenched, iodine programs are often surprisingly durable even during national crises, for example, war-torn Afghanistan and Yemen are iodine-sufficient. However, the equity of iodized salt programs within countries remains an important issue. In summary, continued support of iodine programs is needed to sustain these remarkable global achievements, and to reach the remaining iodine-deficient countries.

Disparities in Telemedicine Use for Subspecialty Diabetes Care During COVID-19 Shelter-In-Place Orders.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine use rapidly and dramatically increased for management of diabetes mellitus. It is unknown whether access to telemedicine care has been equitable during this time. This study aimed to identify patient-level factors associated with adoption of telemedicine for subspecialty diabetes care during the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study using data from a single academic medical center. We used multivariate logistic regression to explore associations between telemedicine use and demographic factors for patients receiving subspecialty diabetes care between March 19 and June 30, 2020. We then surveyed a sample of patients who received in-person care to understand why these patients did not use telemedicine. RESULTS: Among 1292 patients who received subspecialty diabetes care during the study period, those over age 65 were less likely to use telemedicine (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.22-0.52, P < .001), as were patients with a primary language other than English (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.91, P = .02), and patients with public insurance (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.49-0.84, P = .001). Perceived quality of care and technological barriers were the most common reasons cited for choosing in-person care during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that, amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been disparities in telemedicine use by age, language, and insurance for patients with diabetes mellitus. We anticipate telemedicine will continue to be an important care modality for chronic conditions in the years ahead. Significant work must therefore be done to ensure that telemedicine services do not introduce or widen population health disparities.