ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Elderly Population with COVID-19 and the Accuracy of Clinical Scales and D-Dimer for Pulmonary Embolism: The OCTA-COVID Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of the functioning of temporary dialysis catheters in patients with COVID-19.Jornal vascular brasileiro · 2025Article
- Article
- Sepsis-associated acute kidney injury: consensus report of the 28th Acute Disease Quality Initiative workgroup.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2023Review
- Special Issue "COVID-19 and Venous Thromboembolism".Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Coagulation parameters predict COVID-19-related thrombosis in a neural network with a positive predictive value of 98.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElderly COVID-19 patients have a high risk of pulmonary embolism (PE), but factors that predict PE are unknown in this population. This study assessed the Wells and revised Geneva scoring systems as predictors of PE and their relationships with D-dimer (DD) in this population.
methodsThis was a longitudinal, observational study that included patients ≥75 years old with COVID-19 and suspected PE. The performances of the Wells score, revised Geneva score and DD levels were assessed. The combinations of the DD level and the clinical scales were evaluated using positive rules for higher specificity.
resultsAmong 305 patients included in the OCTA-COVID study cohort, 50 had suspected PE based on computed tomography pulmonary arteriography (CTPA), and the prevalence was 5.6%. The frequencies of PE in the low-, intermediate- and high-probability categories were 5.9%, 88.2% and 5.9% for the Geneva model and 35.3%, 58.8% and 5.9% for the Wells model, respectively. The DD median was higher in the PE group (4.33 mg/L; interquartile range (IQR) 2.40-7.17) than in the no PE group (1.39 mg/L; IQR 1.01-2.75) (
conclusionsThe cutoff point DD > 4.33 mg/L has an increased specificity, which can discriminate false positives. The addition of the DD and the clinical probability scales increases the specificity and negative predictive value, which helps to avoid unnecessary invasive tests in this 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.