ArticleERJ open research2026
Deep-learning networks accurately detect pulmonary hypertension in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.
Article in ERJ open research, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is currently no widely used noninvasive tool that accurately predicts pulmonary hypertension (PH) in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). We aimed to assess the feasibility of developing deep-learning algorithms for detecting PH in patients with IPF. Methods: A retrospective derivation cohort included patients with IPF and PH and patients with IPF without PH, matched for age, sex and forced vital capacity (FVC%). Individual echocardiographic frames were split into a training and a validation set. The network consisted of three connected two-dimensional convolutional subnetworks; each one accepted an apical four-chamber view, a parasternal short-axis view and a lung computed tomography view from the same individual, respectively. The output was then merged with serum brain natriuretic peptide levels and diffusion lung capacity of carbon monoxide. Results: Overall, 65 patients with PH and IPF (68.6±7.2 years, 75.4% female, FVC 62.7%) and 65 matched patients without PH were included in the derivation cohort. A training set of 122 patients with and without PH revealed a >99% accuracy in detecting PH. A validation set demonstrated 87.5% accuracy per patient for correctly detecting PH (area under the curve (AUC) 0.971, 95% CI 00.521-1.000; p=0.0004; sensitivity 83.3%, specificity 100%). An external testing set of six patients with IPF and PH and six matched patients without PH showed 87.5% accuracy per patient (AUC 0.844, 95% CI 0.540-0.992; p=0.03; sensitivity 100%, specificity 75.0%). Conclusions: Deep-learning algorithms can accurately predict PH in patients with IPF. Further validation in a larger external cohort is warranted.
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.