Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36016667›Full record

ArticlePulmonary circulation2022

Clinical application of risk assessment in PAH: Expert center APRN recommendations.

Melisa Wilson, Jennifer Keeley, Martha Kingman, Susanne McDevitt, Jacqueline Brewer, Frances Rogers, Wendy Hill, Zachary Rideman, Meredith Broderick

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Melisa WilsonAdventHealth Orlando Florida USA.
Jennifer KeeleyAllegheny Health Network, Allegheny General Hospital Pittsburgh Pennsylvania USA.
Martha KingmanUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3560-2066
Susanne McDevittMichigan Medicine Ann Arbor Michigan USA.
Jacqueline BrewerBeaumont Health Troy Michigan USA.
Frances RogersTemple University Hospital Pulmonary Hypertension, Right Heart Failure and CTEPH Program Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.
Wendy HillCedars Sinai Medical Group Los Angeles California USA.
Zachary RidemanUnited Therapeutics Corporation Silver Spring Maryland USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3359-0871
Meredith BroderickUnited Therapeutics Corporation Silver Spring Maryland USA.
United Therapeutics (United States) · USAdventHealth Orlando · USAllegheny Health Network · USBeaumont Health · USCedars-Sinai Medical Center · USMichigan Medicine · USTemple University Hospital · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Performing longitudinal and consistent risk assessments for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is important to help guide treatment decisions to achieve early on and maintain a low-risk status and improve patient morbidity and mortality. Clinical gestalt or expert perception alone may over or underestimate a patient's risk status. Indeed, regular and continued use of validated risk assessment tools more accurately predict patients' survival. Effective PAH risk assessments are often underutilized even though many seasoned clinicians will attest to using these tools routinely. We present recommendations based on real-world experience in varied clinical practice settings around the United States for overcoming barriers to facilitate regular, serial formal risk assessment. Expert advanced practice provider clinicians from mid to large-size medical centers collaborated to formulate recommendations based on multiple discourses and discussions. Enlisting the help of support staff, such as medical assistants and nurses, to fill in available risk parameters in risk assessment tools can save time for providers and increase efficiency, as can technology-based solutions such as integrating risk assessments into electronic medical records. Modified, abbreviated risk assessment tools can be applied to a patient's clinical scenario when all of a patient's data are not available to complete a more comprehensive assessment. Initial discussions regarding the overall meaning and prognostic importance of risk scores may assist patients to take on a more active role in terms of informed decision-making regarding their care. A collaborative approach can help clinics establish consistent use of risk assessment.

Indexed as

mortality risk assessmentmultiparameter risk assessmentpulmonary arterial hypertensionREVEALrisk assessment tools

Identifiers

PMID36016667
PMCPMC9395695
OpenAlexW4283640112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.