ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2025
Physician perspectives on pulmonary hypertension in ILD: results of a cases-based survey.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary hypertension (PH) complicates the course of patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) in 30-55% of cases and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The optimal timing of diagnostic right heart catheterization (RHC) and the impact of transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) imaging on this decision remain uncertain. This study explores physician decision-making regarding PH suspicion in patients with ILD, and the necessity for TTE and RHC.
methodsA case-based survey was conducted among physicians from diverse geographic and professional backgrounds. Participants assessed anonymized ILD cases, providing their clinical suspicion of PH and recommendations for TTE and then RHC both before and after receiving TTE results. Predictive accuracy for PH was compared to the FORD index, a validated scoring system.
resultsThere were 10 cases provided, of which 3 had hemodynamically confirmed PH and 7 did not have PH. There were 42 respondents to the survey. Following the TTE results, the proportion of responses indicating high suspicion for PH increased in all PH cases and also increased in some non-PH cases. In PH cases, respondents accurately predicted mPAP ≥ 25 in 98.4% and PVR ≥ 3 Woods Units in 90.5% of responses, although only 24.6% and 20.6% matched the value ranges, respectively. In non-PH cases, mPAP < 25 and PVR < 3 Wood Units were correctly identified in 60.9% and 67.0% of responses, with 30% incorrectly predicting PH. Compared to the FORD index (sensitivity: 43.7%, specificity: 86.6%), respondents demonstrated higher sensitivity (88.9%) but lower specificity (70.1%) for PH diagnosis.
conclusionsPhysicians demonstrate high sensitivity but moderate specificity in predicting PH, both with and without TTE results. The FORD index had greater specificity and may serve as a complementary tool, reducing the need for unnecessary RHCs. Standardized protocols are needed to facilitate detection of PH while optimizing the timing of RHCs in ILD patients.
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.