ArticleThrombosis and haemostasis2023
Developing Validated Tools to Identify Pulmonary Embolism in Electronic Databases: Rationale and Design of the PE-EHR+ Study.
Article in Thrombosis and haemostasis, 2023. 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.
- Global burden of venous thromboembolism: incidence and outcome estimates of deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2026Review
- Adjudicated Cardiovascular Events in Patients With COVID-19: Association With Vaccination Status and Changes over Time.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Impact of aspirin therapy on progression of thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms.Atherosclerosis · 2025Article
- Effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban vs warfarin in patients with pulmonary embolism and right ventricular dysfunction: a retrospective cohort study.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Disparities in Current Pulmonary Embolism Management and Outcomes: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2025Review
- Derivation and external validation of a portable method to identify patients with pulmonary embolism from radiology reports: The READ-PE algorithm.Thrombosis research · 2024Article
- Endovascular Therapies for Pulmonary Embolism: A Landscape of Uncertainties and Opportunities.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundContemporary pulmonary embolism (PE) research, in many cases, relies on data from electronic health records (EHRs) and administrative databases that use International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Natural language processing (NLP) tools can be used for automated chart review and patient identification. However, there remains uncertainty with the validity of ICD-10 codes or NLP algorithms for patient identification.
methodsThe PE-EHR+ study has been designed to validate ICD-10 codes as Principal Discharge Diagnosis, or Secondary Discharge Diagnoses, as well as NLP tools set out in prior studies to identify patients with PE within EHRs. Manual chart review by two independent abstractors by predefined criteria will be the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values will be determined. We will assess the discriminatory function of code subgroups for intermediate- and high-risk PE. In addition, accuracy of NLP algorithms to identify PE from radiology reports will be assessed.
resultsA total of 1,734 patients from the Mass General Brigham health system have been identified. These include 578 with ICD-10 Principal Discharge Diagnosis codes for PE, 578 with codes in the secondary position, and 578 without PE codes during the index hospitalization. Patients within each group were selected randomly from the entire pool of patients at the Mass General Brigham health system. A smaller subset of patients will also be identified from the Yale-New Haven Health System. Data validation and analyses will be forthcoming.
conclusionsThe PE-EHR+ study will help validate efficient tools for identification of patients with PE in EHRs, improving the reliability of efficient observational studies or randomized trials of patients with PE using electronic databases.
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.