SynthesisJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2016
Comparison of the Wells score with the revised Geneva score for assessing suspected pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
51 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative diagnostic accuracy of pre-test clinical probability scores for the risk stratification of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Design-related bias in studies investigating diagnostic tests for venous thromboembolic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Concordance of the modified wells score with CTPA-confirmed pulmonary embolism in an imaging-selected cohort: A retrospective single-center study.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- H-X model: A novel tool for predicting pulmonary embolism in lung cancer.Chinese medical journal · 2026Article
- Comparison of the effectiveness of clinical judgment, wells score and revised geneva score in suspected pulmonary embolism.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Machine learning improves prediction of pulmonary thromboembolism and reduces unnecessary computed tomography scans in the emergency department.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Application of a diagnostic strategy for patients with suspected pulmonary embolism in a middle-income country.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Observational
- Which Is More Valuable in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Thromboembolism? The Wells Score, the Revised Geneva Score, or the Padua Score?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The prevalence and risk factors of pulmonary embolism in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Thrombosis journal · 2025Review
- Risk factors for pulmonary embolism in malignant tumors patients with lower limb deep vein thrombosis: a retrospective study.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Diagnostic value of systematic compression ultrasonography for the detection of unrecognized venous thromboembolism in patients admitted to an internal medicine ward for dyspnea.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Reassessing D-dimer Cut-offs for Pulmonary Embolism: A Path Toward Safer and More Cost-effective Diagnosis.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2025Article
- Apelin-13 as a novel diagnostic laboratory biomarker in thromboembolic disorders: a review of literature with prospective insights.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Review
- Development of a predictive nomogram for early identification of pulmonary embolism in hospitalized patients: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Cardiac Tamponade After Video-Assisted Thoracoscopy Surgical Diaphragmatic Plication.Annals of thoracic surgery short reports · 2024Article
- Predictive ability of the REMS and HOTEL scoring systems for mortality in geriatric patients with pulmonary embolism.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Early Detection of Pulmonary Embolism in a General Patient Population Immediately Upon Hospital Admission Using Machine Learning to Identify New, Unidentified Risk Factors: Model Development Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Clinical Presentation and Risk Stratification of Pulmonary Embolism.The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc · 2024Review
- Pulmonary Embolism in Pregnancy: A Review for Clinical Practitioners.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
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
The Wells score and the revised Geneva score are two most commonly used clinical rules for excluding pulmonary embolism (PE). In this study, we aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of these two rules; we also compared the diagnostic accuracy between them. We searched PubMed and Web of science up to April 2015. Studies assessed Wells score and revised Geneva score for diagnosis suspected PE were included. The summary area under the curve (AUC) and the 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Eleven studies were included in this meta-analysis. For Wells score, the sensitivity ranged from 63.8 to 79.3 %, and the specificity ranged from 48.8 to 90.0 %. The overall weighted AUC was 0.778 (95 % CI 0.740-0.818; Z = 9.88, P < 0.001). For revised Geneva score, the sensitivity ranged from 55.3 to 73.6 %. The overall weighted AUC was 0.693 (95 % CI 0.653-0.736; Z = 11.96, P < 0.001). 95 % CIs of two AUCs were not overlapped, which indicated Wells score was more accurate than revised Geneva score for predicting PE in suspected patients. Meta-regression showed diagnostic accuracy of these two rules was not related with PE prevalence. Sensitivity analysis by only included prospective studies showed the results were robust. Our results showed the Wells score was more effective than the revised Geneva score in discriminate PE in suspected patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26178041What 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.