ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Delphi case: Sharing of clinical experiences for improvement in the treatment of chronic venous disease.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Thoracic outlet syndrome : Interdisciplinary diagnostics and treatment].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Clinical evidence and rationale of mesoglycan to treat chronic venous disease and hemorrhoidal disease: a narrative review.Updates in surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic venous disease (CVD) is a common condition with major health consequences that is associated with poor long-term prognosis, significant socioeconomic impact, disabling symptoms, and reduced quality of life. To provide a novel evidence-based approach in the management of CVD, a consensus process ("Delphi Case") following a first Delphi Consensus was conceived. With a real-life fashion analysis, a steering committee formed by 3 expert leaders on chronic venous disease drove a panel of 77 expert Italian angiologists/vascular surgeons along a collegial discussion, integrating data coming from the guidelines recommendations of different Vascular Scientific Societies with the consensus agreement statements gathered from the first Delphi Consensus, and with data coming from the discussion of few statements in which there was disagreement. From July 15 to October 16, 2020, demographic, anamnestic, objective, and therapeutic data coming from a total of 2,275 patients were collected by the experts panel using a predefined case report form. The results of this second consensus provided a real-life picture of CVD management in the Italian population and clearly showed that a tailored therapeutic approach together with an appropriate lifestyle (e.g., diet, physical activity, weight loss) must be considered as the milestones for the CVD-related signs and symptoms clinical improvement in daily clinical practice. An evaluation of the adherence and of the efficacy of the prescribed pharmacological and compressive treatment in a medium-long term follow-up of the study population has been planned as the last step of this course and will be object of a future final publication.
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.