&nbsp;

&nbsp;

<span style="color: #666699;"><em>"Although the limitations of the current use of TSH measurement have been well documented and subject to a number of excellent reviews, we generally lack suggestions as to how to improve clinical management strategies. Obviously, a desirable aim would be to move from a population-based statistical perspective to <strong>a more personalised approach</strong>. While, to an extent, this seems to be what we aim at in good clinical practise when considering<strong> the whole picture</strong> including laboratory tests, clinical examination, and subjective well-being of the patient, it does not appear to be adequately reflected in current evidence-based guidelines [<a href="http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jtr/2012/438037/#B4"><span style="color: #666699;">5</span></a>].</em></span>

<span style="color: #666699;"><em><strong>We conclude that advances in assay techniques have unduly promoted TSH measurement to its current role as an exclusive statistical estimate in its own right and the most important single parameter in thyroid function testing, thereby optimising both convenience and cost. However, the predominant use of TSH as a statistical parameter has some severe shortcomings that limit its clinical usefulness in a given patient. A revision may be needed to reconcile TSH measurement with the challenge of not only evidence-based but personalised medicine.</strong>"</em></span>

<span style="color: #666699;">Rudolf Hoermann and John E. M. Midgley, “TSH Measurement and Its Implications for Personalised Clinical Decision-Making,” <i>Journal of Thyroid Research</i>, vol. 2012, Article ID 438037, 9 pages, 2012. doi:10.1155/2012/438037</span>