ArticleMedicine2018
Patient and hospital characteristics predictive of inferior vena cava filter usage in venous thromboembolism patients: A study from the 2013 to 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database.
Article in Medicine, 2018. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To examine the association between patient and hospital characteristics and inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) utilization in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE).The 2013 to 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database was used to define a cohort of patients with VTE aged ≥18 after a primary VTE diagnosis. Comorbidities of interest were classified via diagnosis codes and IVCF placement was identified via procedure code. Chi square analysis tested differences between patient and hospital-level characteristics and whether or not IVCFs were placed. A hierarchical logistic regression model estimated the relationship between patient-level factors (demographics, socioeconomic status, comorbidities), hospital-level factors (bed size, teaching status, urbanity) and whether or not IVCFs were placed. Additional models were specified to examine goodness of fit across methodological alternatives.There were 212,395 VTE hospitalizations, with 12.18% (n = 25,877) receiving IVCF placement. There were significant differences between those who did and did not receive IVCF placement; notably, those receiving IVCFs were older (P < .001), had Medicare insurance more than private (P < .001), longer lengths of stay (P < .001), and were in privately owned hospitals (P < .001). IVCF placement remained significantly associated with patient and hospital-level characteristics following multivariate adjustment via hierarchical logistic regression; notably, age >80 (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR]: 2.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.25-2.85), ≥13 comorbid conditions (aOR: 3.85, 95% CI: 3.25-4.27), and privately owned hospitals (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.08-1.36). Optimal goodness-of-fit was achieved with a combination of random effects and patient-level fixed effects.These findings provide evidence that combinations of patient and hospital-level factors are related to whether patients with VTE receive IVCFs.
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.