ReviewCureus2025
Prevalence of Pulmonary Hypertension in Patients With Pulmonary Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigating the Complexity of PH-ILD: From Molecular Mechanisms to Integrated Clinical Evaluation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Clinical Significance of Echocardiographic Parameters in Patients with Pulmonary Hypertension Associated with Interstitial Lung Disease.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- Sotatercept in Pulmonary Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis-Associated Pulmonary Hypertension: A Case Series and Systematic Review.Pulmonary circulation · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulmonary hypertension (PH) significantly affects prognosis in patients with pulmonary Langerhans cell histiocytosis (PLCH); however, reported prevalence varies substantially across studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize existing data to estimate the prevalence of PH in PLCH patients. A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase from inception to 2022, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Observational studies reporting PH prevalence in PLCH were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were independently conducted by two reviewers. Pooled prevalence was calculated using a random-effects model with logit transformation, and subgroup analyses explored heterogeneity by diagnostic methods, study designs, and geographical region. Ten observational studies (one prospective cohort, seven retrospective cohorts, two cross-sectional studies; total participants = 14,302) met the inclusion criteria. The overall pooled prevalence of PH in PLCH was 26.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 17.3%-33.3%; I
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.