Following this puts new work involving it at the top of your briefing, with a note saying why it is there. Links are taken from the source record, never inferred.
A narrative review synthesizing mechanistic evidence and clinical trial data on incretin agonists' cardiovascular effects, providing expert interpretation of existing evidence rather than new primary data.
International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science
A narrative review synthesizing heterogeneous literature to raise mechanistic hypotheses about microbiota–treatment interactions, lacking original data, effect sizes, or a defined study population to support clinical claims.
This is a protocol for a retrospective cohort study with an acknowledged small sample size (30–60 patients) and retrospective design; it is designed to generate preliminary data and hypotheses rather than definitive evidence, and no results are yet reported.
A narrative review proposing a multifaceted adjuvant therapy algorithm to mitigate GLP-1 agonist adverse events; lacks primary trial evidence and explicitly calls for RCT validation.
First-in-human Phase 1a/1b trial with primary endpoints of safety and tolerability; pharmacodynamic weight loss and metabolic findings are encouraging but uncontrolled comparisons in a small, early-phase study cannot yet support practice changes.
International Journal of Medical & Pharmaceutical Sciences
A narrative review synthesizing evidence from pivotal trials to evaluate GLP-1 receptor agonists for weight management, offering clinical recommendations rather than reporting original research.
A narrative review synthesising current understanding of obesity management across non-pharmacological, herbal, approved pharmacological and emerging therapeutic strategies, without presenting new primary data or systematic evidence synthesis.
This is an official multisociety hypertension guideline from the AHA/ACC that synthesizes evidence across populations and provides clinical recommendations for practice.