ArticlePediatric surgery international2020
Pediatric trauma venous thromboembolism prediction algorithm outperforms current anticoagulation prophylaxis guidelines: a pilot study.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Model-Guided Decision-Making for Thromboprophylaxis and Hospital-Acquired Thromboembolic Events Among Hospitalized Children and Adolescents: The CLOT Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Thromboprophylaxis in pediatric patients with earthquake-related crush syndrome: a single centre experience.Pediatric surgery international · 2023Article
- Article
- Association of venous thromboembolism following pediatric traumatic spinal injuries with injury severity and longer hospital stays.Journal of neurosurgery. Spine · 2022Article
- Article
- Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after pediatric trauma.Pediatric surgery international · 2021Review
- Pediatric Orthopaedic Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review Investigating Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcome.JB & JS open accessArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVenous thromboembolism (VTE) in injured children is rare, but sequelae can be morbid and life-threatening. Recent trauma society guidelines suggesting that all children over 15 years old should receive thromboprophylaxis may result in overtreatment. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of a previously published VTE prediction algorithm and compare it to current recommendations.
methodsTwo institutional trauma registries were queried for all pediatric (age < 18 years) patients admitted from 2007 to 2018. Clinical data were applied to the algorithm and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to test algorithm efficacy.
resultsA retrospective review identified 8271 patients with 30 episodes of VTE (0.36%). The VTE prediction algorithm classified 51 (0.6%) as high risk (> 5% risk), 322 (3.9%) as moderate risk (1-5% risk) and 7898 (95.5%) as low risk (< 1% risk). AUROC was 0.93 (95% CI 0.89-0.97). In our population, prophylaxis of the 'moderate-' and 'high-risk' cohorts would outperform the sensitivity (60% vs. 53%) and specificity (96% vs. 77%) of current guidelines while anticoagulating substantially fewer patients (373 vs. 1935, p < 0.001).
conclusionA VTE prediction algorithm using clinical variables can identify injured children at risk for venous thromboembolic disease with more discrimination than current guidelines. Prospective studies are needed to investigate the validity of this model. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III-Clinical decision rule evaluated in a single population.
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.