ArticleAmerican journal of cardiovascular disease2023
Comparing the "simplified revised Geneva score", the "original PESI", and the "simplified PESI" for mortality prediction for pulmonary embolism. A 10 years follow-up study.
Article in American journal of cardiovascular disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Associated Infections on the Clinical Course and Risk-Stratification Profile of Pulmonary Embolism: Comparative Analysis Using PESI, Wells, Padua, and IMPROVE Scores.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- D-dimer/high sensitive troponin I ratio is useful in predicting in-hospital mortality in pulmonary embolism patients.Irish journal of medical science · 2024Article
- Review
- Prognostic Value of Inflammatory Biomarkers for Mortality in Intensive Care Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Retrospective Observational Study.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this research was to investigate and compare the utilization of the revised Geneva score, original PESI, and simplified PESI in predicting the long-term mortality rate of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE).
methodsThis retrospective investigation was conducted in Isfahan between June 2014 and July 2015 on patients with PE who were referred to our medical center. In this study, the revised Geneva score, the original PESI scales, and the simplified PESI scales were utilized. Additionally, diagnostic and treatment procedures were done in accordance with the standard protocol. We collected data of patients including gender, age, any risk factors for venous thromboembolism. After the primary data collection, contacts were made to the patients or their relatives for gathering information about patient's survival. The mortality rates of patients were determined within 10 years after the PE.
resultsWe analyzed data of 224 patients. Over a 131-month course of following up 224 patients, 105 deaths occurred that were related to PE. The initial PESI factor had a positive and negative predictive value of 83%. Patients with PE who scored extremely high on the PESI had a mortality and morbidity rate 42 times (9.22-87.32) greater than those with PE who scored very low. Furthermore, the death and morbidity rate of high-risk PE patients was 5% (0.67-1.70) in the Geneva score and 62% (0.30-2.31) in the simplified PESI score.
conclusionThe use of original PESI score could predict the long-term mortality of PE patients more accurately than other scores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38026110PMC10658050W4389179698What 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.