ArticlePulmonary circulation2022
Clinical application of risk assessment in PAH: Expert center APRN recommendations.
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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic Value of Serial Risk Stratification in Adult and Pediatric Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Pooled it
- Risk stratification in adult and pediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension: A systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- 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
- 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 and treatment goals in pulmonary arterial hypertension.The European respiratory journal · 2024Review
- The Benefits and Imperative of Venous Thromboembolism Risk Screening for Hospitalized Patients: A Systematic Review.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
- Evaluation of the European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society derived three- and four-strata risk stratification models in pulmonary arterial hypertension: introducing an internet-based risk stratification calculator.European heart journal open · 2023Article
- Clinical application of risk assessment in PAH: Expert center APRN recommendations.Pulmonary circulation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.