ArticleWorld journal of critical care medicine2025
Palliative care in pulmonary hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in World journal of critical care 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a debilitating and progressive pulmonary pathology that often leads to death. Guidelines recommend the use of palliative care (PC) early in the treatment course to ease the burden of symptoms; however, uptake remains low.
aimTo evaluate barriers to PC uptake and determine its association with mortality in patients with PAH.
methodsAll studies discussing PC in PAH were selected in our review and analysis. Clinical and cross-sectional studies were included. Barriers were described in a qualitative fashion. A random-effects meta-analysis was also conducted, in which the odds ratio for mortality was pooled and reported, along with 95% confidence intervals.
resultsA total of 19 studies were included in the review. The most common barriers identified included feeling like the patients were "not sick enough", belief that PC is only appropriate for end-of-life care, belief that it would burden family members, and general feelings of hopelessness. Physicians identified structural causes, such as a lack of funding and low levels of PC-related knowledge, as barriers to recommending PC. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in mortality across four included studies (Log odds ratio = 0.89, 95% confidence intervals: -3.06-1.28). Heterogeneity was high (
conclusionUptake of PC in PAH is low due to patient and physician-level barriers, which can be overcome with systematic PC integration. Long-term studies are also needed to investigate the impact of PC on outcomes in PAH, as the current limited data show no significant difference.
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.