SynthesisBMJ open2016
Systematic review of prognostic models for recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) post-treatment of first unprovoked VTE.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 10 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in the prediction of venous thromboembolism: A systematic review and pooled analysis.European journal of haematology · 2023Pooled it
- Thrombophilia testing: A British Society for Haematology guideline.British journal of haematology · 2022Guideline
- Prognostic models for predicting in-hospital paediatric mortality in resource-limited countries: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.Blood advances · 2020Guideline
- The Unrealised Potential for Predicting Pregnancy Complications in Women with Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- A systematic review of methodology used in the development of prediction models for future asthma exacerbation.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Pooled it
- Systematic review of clinical prediction models to support the diagnosis of asthma in primary care.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2019Pooled it
- A systematic review of epigenetic biomarkers in progression from non-dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus to oesophageal adenocarcinoma.BMJ open · 2018Pooled it
- Systematic review of prognostic prediction models for acute kidney injury (AKI) in general hospital populations.BMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- Systematic review of risk prediction scores for surgical site infection or periprosthetic joint infection following joint arthroplasty.Epidemiology and infection · 2017Pooled it
- Transcriptomic analysis identifies immune-related clusters and PPP2R1A as a candidate gene associated with venous thromboembolism recurrence.Archives of pharmacal research · 2026Article
- Contemporary Challenges in Venous Thromboembolism: Evolving Populations and Implications for Management and Risk Stratification.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Systematic review of methods used in prediction models with recurrent event data.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2024Article
- Stability of clinical prediction models developed using statistical or machine learning methods.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2023Article
- Risk of Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism in Selected Subgroups of Men: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study.TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Article
- Review
- Risk factors of thrombotic recurrence and major bleeding in patients with intermediate-risk for recurrence of venous thromboembolism.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2022Article
- Current Knowledge on Factor V Leiden Mutation as a Risk Factor for Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Is pulmonary embolism recurrence linked with the severity of the first event? A French retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Predicting Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Deep-Vein Thrombosis: Development and Internal Validation of a Potential New Prediction Model (Continu-8).Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
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
Abstract
objectivesTo review studies developing or validating a prognostic model for individual venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence risk following cessation of therapy for a first unprovoked VTE. Prediction of recurrence risk is crucial to informing patient prognosis and treatment decisions. The review aims to determine whether reliable prognostic models exist and, if not, what further research is needed within the field.
designBibliographic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library) were searched using index terms relating to the clinical field and prognosis. Screening of titles, abstracts and subsequently full texts was conducted by 2 reviewers independently using predefined criteria. Quality assessment and critical appraisal of included full texts was based on an early version of the PROBAST (Prediction study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool) for risk of bias and applicability in prognostic model studies.
settingStudies in any setting were included. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome for the review was the predictive accuracy of identified prognostic models in relation to VTE recurrence risk.
results3 unique prognostic models were identified including the HERDOO2 score, Vienna prediction model and DASH score. Quality assessment highlighted the Vienna, and DASH models were developed with generally strong methodology, but the HERDOO2 model had many methodological concerns. Further, all models were considered at least at moderate risk of bias, primarily due to the need for further external validation before use in practice.
conclusionsAlthough the Vienna model shows the most promise (based on strong development methodology, applicability and having some external validation), none of the models can be considered ready for use until further, external and robust validation is performed in new data. Any new models should consider the inclusion of predictors found to be consistently important in existing models (sex, site of index event, D-dimer), and take heed of several methodological issues identified through this review. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42013003494.
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.