ArticlePulmonary circulation2026
An Abbreviated Assessment Tool for Detection of Pulmonary Hypertension in Patients With Interstitial Lung Disease.
Article in Pulmonary circulation, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a major complication of interstitial lung disease (ILD) and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Early recognition of PH in ILD is crucial for guiding diagnostic evaluation, initiating treatment, and considering lung transplantation. The previously developed PH-ILD Detection Tool by Parikh et al. incorporated eight variables to stratify patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, and was subsequently validated in an independent cohort. While effective, the multi-component score may be difficult to implement in routine practice. The aim of this study was to develop a simplified assessment tool for PH in ILD that relies on easily obtainable clinical data. We retrospectively evaluated 154 ILD patients who underwent right heart catheterization. The abbreviated PH-ILD score assigned one point each for: (1) physical examination findings suggestive of PH, (2) diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide < 40% predicted, and (3) supplemental oxygen use (range 0-3). Diagnostic performance was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and an ROC curve. The mean age was 70.0 ± 12.1 years, and the overall prevalence of PH was 48.1%. PH prevalence increased with higher scores: 14.3% (score 0), 58.1% (score 1), 79.0% (score 2), and 87.2% (score 3). The abbreviated tool demonstrated good discriminatory ability (AUC 0.74; 95% CI 0.65-0.82;
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.