ArticlePediatric research2015
Development of a pediatric-specific clinical probability tool for diagnosis of venous thromboembolism: a feasibility study.
Article in Pediatric research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of impregnated central venous catheters on thrombosis in paediatric intensive care: Post-hoc analyses of the CATCH trial.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram model for central venous access device-related thrombosis in hospitalized children.European journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Venous Thromboembolism in Children and Young Adults in Korea: Analysis of the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service Database.Journal of Korean medical science · 2019Article
- Epidemiology and Risk Assessment of Pediatric Venous Thromboembolism.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2017Review
- Pediatric thromboembolism: a national survey in Japan.International journal of hematology · 2017Article
- Venous thromboembolism in childhood: where is Brazil after 20 years?Hematology, transfusion and cell therapyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPediatric venous thromboembolism (VTE) is an increasingly common, difficult to diagnose problem. Clinical probability tools (CPT) for adults estimate VTE likelihood, but are not available for children. We hypothesized that a pediatric-specific CPT is feasible.
methodsRadiology reports were utilized to identify children imaged for suspected VTE. Relevant signs, symptoms, and comorbidity variables, identified from published literature, were extracted from corresponding medical records. Variables associated with pediatric VTE were incorporated into a multivariate logistic regression to create a pilot CPT which was confirmed on a separate cohort.
resultsA total of 389 subjects meeting inclusion criteria were identified: 91 with VTE and 298 without. Univariate analysis revealed male gender (odds ratio (OR) = 2.96; P < 0.001), asymmetric extremity (OR = 1.76; P = 0.033), central venous catheter utilization and/or dysfunction (OR = 2.51; P < 0.001), and cancer (OR = 2.35; P = 0.014) as VTE predictive variables. Documentation of an alternate diagnosis was inversely related to VTE (OR = 0.42; P = 0.004). Receiver operating characteristic analysis of the derived CPT demonstrated reasonable ability to discriminate VTE probability in the training cohort (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.73; P < 0.001) and moderate discrimination in a separate validation cohort of 149 children (AUC = 0.64; P = 0.011).
conclusionA pediatric-specific VTE CPT is feasible, would facilitate early diagnosis, and could lead to improved outcomes.
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.