ArticlePulmonary circulation2022
Utilization of risk assessment tools in management of PAH: A PAH provider survey.
Article in Pulmonary circulation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing treatment decisions in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2026Article
- Article
- Expert consensus on patient engagement strategies for improving patient activation and shared decision making in pulmonary arterial hypertension.Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners · 2026Article
- Current Therapeutic Patterns of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in Korea: A Five-Year Follow-up of the PHOENIKS Longitudinal Cohort.Korean circulation journal · 2026Article
- Parenteral prostacyclin utilization in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension in the intermediate-risk strata: a retrospective chart review and cross-sectional survey.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- Risk stratification and treatment goals in pulmonary arterial hypertension.The European respiratory journal · 2024Review
- Congruency between clinician-assessed risk and calculated risk of 1-year mortality in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: A retrospective chart review.Pulmonary circulation · 2024Article
- Risk Stratification in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension, Update and Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Risk assessment in pulmonary arterial hypertension: A step towards clinical implementation based on the 2022 ESC/ERS pulmonary hypertension guidelines.Pulmonary circulation · 2023Article
- Utilization of risk assessment tools in management of PAH: A PAH provider survey.Pulmonary circulation · 2022Article
- Treatment of pulmonary hypertension after seven world symposia.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
14 authors at 13 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a chronically progressive fatal disease. A goal-oriented approach to achieve low risk status has been associated with improved survival. A variety of risk stratification tools are available, but use is low. We conducted a survey to assess potential reasons for under-utilization. We conducted a survey-based study of global PAH disease specialists with a goal of assessing risk assessment utilization and identifying modifiable barriers to use. The survey was designed by the American College of Chest Physicians' Pulmonary Vascular Diseases (PVD) NetWork. Respondents were global members of the PVD NetWork and Pulmonary Hypertension Association. Survey invitations were sent electronically to all members. Participation was anonymous and no provider or patient level data was collected. Participants from four countries responded with the majority (84%) being from the United States. Our survey found suboptimal use of any risk stratification tool with 71/112 (63%) reporting use. A total of 85% of the respondents had more than 5 years of experience in managing PAH. REVEAL 2.0 and European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society risk tools were the most commonly used. A total of 44 (65%) surveyed felt that use of risk tools led to change in PAH therapies. Only 6 (9%) felt they prompted additional testing or changed the frequency of follow-up. A total of 5 (7%) reported they prompted goals of care/palliative care discussions and 2 (3%) that they triggered lung transplant referral. The vast majority indicated that incorporation of risk tools into electronic medical records (EMR) would improve utilization. PAH risk assessment tools remain under-utilized. Most respondents were experienced PAH clinicians. More than one-third were not routinely using risk tools. Most felt that risk tools led to PAH therapy changes but few reported impacts on other aspects of care. The most commonly identified barriers to use were time constraints and lack of integration with EMR.
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.