ReviewPulmonary circulation
Serious illness conversations in pulmonary hypertension.
Review in Pulmonary circulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preference for advance care planning in patients with pulmonary hypertension.Heart and vessels · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Delays and Quality of Life in Japanese Patients with Pulmonary Hypertension: A Nationwide Survey.Pulmonary therapy · 2025Article
- Transplantation, bridging, and support technologies in pulmonary hypertension.The European respiratory journal · 2024Review
- Patient perspectives on pulmonary hypertension in the United States: Burdens, expectations, and goals.Pulmonary circulation · 2023Review
- Beneath the surface: a narrative review of multidimensional burdens and pathways to patient-centered care in PAH.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulmonary arterial hypertension has evolved from a fatal disease with few treatment options to a chronic condition with improved survival. This improvement is possible through development of effective therapies as well as the expansion of risk stratification scores to assist clinical decision making. Despite improved disease control, quality of life, and overall prognosis, many challenges remain. The treatment itself is burdensome, with significant impact on quality of life. Many patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension still present with advanced, often end-stage disease. Increased use of mechanical circulatory support and catheter-based interventions have expanded use of extracorporeal life support and right ventricle assist devices. For these reasons as well as the long-term relationships pulmonary hypertension physicians have with patients and their families, navigating the course of the illness in a considered, proactive way is essential. Understanding individual goals and revisiting them as they change over time requires comfort with the conversation itself. There are many barriers and challenges to having effective, compassionate conversations in the clinical setting with time constraints being the most often cited. Compressed visits are necessarily focused on the clinical aspects, therapy and medication adherence and tolerance. Clinicians are sometimes wary of diminishing hope in the face of ongoing treatment. Having sufficient experience and comfort with these discussions can be empowering. In this paper, we discuss the challenges involved and propose a framework to assist in incorporating these discussions into clinical care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.