ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Automating venous thromboembolism risk assessment: a dual-branch deep learning method using electronic medical records.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating longitudinal data accuracy in postpartum venous thromboembolism risk assessments: a retrospective observational study.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Observational
- Construction and Validation of a Risk Prediction Model for Postoperative Lower Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis in Patients with Vascular Access Devices: A Retrospective Analysis.Vascular health and risk management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a prevalent cardiovascular disease. Although risk assessment and preventive measures are effective, manual assessment is inefficient and covers a small population in clinical practice. Hence, it is necessary to explore intelligent methods for VTE risk assessment. Methods: The Padua scale has been widely used in VTE risk assessment, and we divided its assessment into disease category judgment and comprehensive clinical information judgment according to the characteristics of the Padua scale. We proposed a dual-branch deep learning (DB-DL) assessment method. First, in the disease category branch, we propose a deep learning-based Padua disease classification model (PDCM) for determining patients' Padua disease categories by considering patients' diagnosis, symptoms, and symptom weights. In the branch of comprehensive clinical information, we use the Chinese lexical analysis (LAC) word separation technique, combined with professional corpus and rules, to extract and judge the comprehensive clinical factors in the electronic medical record (EMR). Results: We validated the accuracy of the method with the Padua assessment results of 7,690 Chinese clinical EMRs. First, our proposed method allows for a fully automated assessment, and the average time to assess one patient is only 0.37 s. Compared to the gold standard, our method has an Area Under Curve (AUC) value of 0.883, a specificity value of 0.957, and a sensitivity value of 0.816 for assessing the Padua risk patient class. Conclusion: Our DB-DL assessment method automates VTE risk assessment, thereby addressing the challenges of time-consuming evaluation and limited population coverage. Thus, this method is highly clinically valuable.
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.