ReviewCirculation2024
Standardized Data Elements for Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Consensus Report From the Pulmonary Embolism Research Collaborative.
Review in Circulation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Hospital Volume With Outcomes of Pulmonary Embolism in the United States.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Pulmonary Embolism in the United States: A Report From the National PERT Consortium.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Integrated Radiology-Biochemistry Diagnostic Flow Framework for Emergency Clinical Decision Support: A Simulation-Based Educational Model.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Ventricular septum curvature ratio: a novel imaging marker to predict clinical deterioration in normotensive acute pulmonary embolism.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Predicting Deterioration in Patients With Normotensive Acute Pulmonary Embolism Using Clinical-Imaging Features: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Observational
- Common Data Element (CDE) Success from Community-Engagement Not Mandates: If You Build It [Data Warehouse], Will They [Participants] Come?American journal of public health · 2025Article
- Application of multigene panel testing for bleeding, thrombotic, and platelet disorders in patients and the general population in China.Molecular biomedicine · 2025Article
- Mechanical circulatory support in acute pulmonary embolism.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based risk of pulmonary embolism in stroke patients with lower extremity deep vein thrombosis construction and validation of a prediction model.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent advances in therapy and the promulgation of multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism teams show great promise to improve management and outcomes of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). However, the absence of randomized evidence and lack of consensus leads to tremendous variations in treatment and compromises the wide implementation of new innovations. Moreover, the changing landscape of health care, where quality, cost, and accountability are increasingly relevant, dictates that a broad spectrum of outcomes of care must be routinely monitored to fully capture the impact of modern PE treatment. We set out to standardize data collection in patients with PE undergoing evaluation and treatment, and thus establish the foundation for an expanding evidence base that will address gaps in evidence and inform future care for acute PE. To do so, >100 international PE thought leaders convened in Washington, DC, in April 2022 to form the Pulmonary Embolism Research Collaborative. Participants included physician experts, key members of the US Food and Drug Administration, patient representatives, and industry leaders. Recognizing the multidisciplinary nature of PE care, the Pulmonary Embolism Research Collaborative was created with representative experts from stakeholder medical subspecialties, including cardiology, pulmonology, vascular medicine, critical care, hematology, cardiac surgery, emergency medicine, hospital medicine, and pharmacology. A list of critical evidence gaps was composed with a matching comprehensive set of standardized data elements; these data points will provide a foundation for productive research, knowledge enhancement, and advancement of clinical care within the field of acute PE, and contribute to answering urgent unmet needs in PE management. Evidence produced through the Pulmonary Embolism Research Collaborative, as it is applied to data collection, promises to provide crucial knowledge that will ultimately produce a robust evidence base that will lead to standardization and harmonization of PE management and improved outcomes.
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.