Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37143830›Full record

ArticleERJ open research2023

Validation of the HULL Score clinical prediction rule for unsuspected pulmonary embolism in ambulatory cancer patients.

Farzana Haque, Jessamine Ryde, Laura Broughton, Chao Huang, Sifut Sethi, Andrew Stephens, Annet Pillai, Shagufta Mirza, Victoria Brown, Ged Avery and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ERJ open research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 48% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Farzana HaqueHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2810-6256
Jessamine RydeHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Laura BroughtonHull York Medical School, Allam Medical Building, University of Hull, Hull, UK.
Chao HuangHull York Medical School, Allam Medical Building, University of Hull, Hull, UK.
Sifut SethiHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Andrew StephensHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0765-0730
Annet PillaiHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Shagufta MirzaHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Victoria BrownHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Ged AveryHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Georgios BozasHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Anthony MaraveyasHull University Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK.
Castle Hill Hospital · GBUniversity of Hull · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) developed to predict adverse outcomes of suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) and facilitate outpatient management have limitations in discriminating outcomes for ambulatory cancer patients with unsuspected PE (UPE). The HULL Score CPR uses a 5‑point scoring system incorporating performance status and self-reported new or recently evolving symptoms at UPE diagnosis. It stratifies patients into low, intermediate and high risk for proximate mortality. This study aimed to validate the HULL Score CPR in ambulatory cancer patients with UPE. Patients and methods: 282 consecutive patients managed under the UPE-acute oncology service in Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust were included from January 2015 to March 2020. The primary end-point was all-cause mortality, and outcome measures were proximate mortality for the three risk categories of the HULL Score CPR. Results: 30-day, 90-day and 180-day mortality rates for the whole cohort were 3.4% (n=7), 21.1% (n=43) and 39.2% (n=80), respectively. The HULL Score CPR stratified patients into low-risk (n=100, 35.5%), intermediate-risk (n=95, 33.7%) and high-risk (n=81, 28.7%) categories. Correlation of the risk categories with 30-day mortality (area under the curve (AUC) 0.717, 95% CI 0.522-0.912), 90-day mortality (AUC 0.772, 95% CI 0.707-0.838), 180-day mortality (AUC 0.751, 95% CI 0.692-0.809) and overall survival (AUC 0.749, 95% CI 0.686-0.811) was consistent with the derivation cohort. Conclusion: This study validates the capacity of the HULL Score CPR to stratify proximate mortality risk in ambulatory cancer patients with UPE. The score uses immediately available clinical parameters and is easy to integrate into an acute outpatient oncology setting.

Identifiers

PMID37143830
PMCPMC10152252
OpenAlexW4318976659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.