Trial reportClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
Development and Validation of a Risk Score for Prediction of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Lung Cancer.
Trial report in Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of risk prediction model of venous thromboembolism for patients with lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Risk factor analysis and prediction of lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis after surgery in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Prognosis of Thromboembolism in Elderly Patients With Stage IV Lung Cancer.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Article
- Tumor-infiltrating platelets promote the growth of lung adenocarcinoma.Translational oncology · 2024Article
- Management of venous thromboembolism in patients with lung cancer: a state-of-the-art review.BMJ open respiratory research · 2023Review
- A novel risk score for venous thromboembolism in lung cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study.F1000Research · 2023Article
- Derivation, validation and assessment of a novel nomogram-based risk assessment model for venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with lung cancer: A retrospective case control study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Risk Factors and Prediction Models for Venous Thromboembolism in Ambulatory Patients with Lung Cancer.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Profile of Solid Tumor Patients Complicated With Venous Thromboembolism: A 10-Year Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study Based on 1482 Cases.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisObservational
- Derivation and External Validation of a Risk Assessment Model of Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Chinese Patients.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and validate a risk score for early prediction of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with lung cancer. A total of 827 patients with lung cancer from February 2013 to February 2018 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic and clinicopathological variables independently correlated to VTE were applied to develop the risk score in the development group while examined in the validation group. The regression coefficients of multivariable logistic regression test were applied to assign a risk score system. The incidence of VTE was 12.3%, 12.7%, and 11.8% in all patients, in the development and validation groups, respectively. The 496 patients in the development group were classified into 3 groups: low risk (scores ≤3), moderate risk (scores 4-5), and high risk (scores ≥6). The risk of VTE was significantly and positively related to the risk scores in both development and validation groups. The risk score system aided proper stratification of patients with either high or low risk of VTE in the development and validation groups (
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.