ArticleBMJ open2024
Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of concurrent VTE diagnosis in hospitalised socially excluded individuals in Ireland.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The incidence and associated factors of pulmonary embolism after cardiac surgery: A retrospective nationwide inpatient sample database study.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
- Syndemics in women's health: poverty, social exclusion, and clustering of thrombotic and hemostasis disorders.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSocial exclusion (such as that experienced by people who are homeless, incarcerated or use drugs) increases morbidity across a range of diseases but is poorly captured in routine data sets. The aim of this study was to use a novel composite variable in a national-level hospital usage dataset to identify social exclusion and to determine whether social exclusion is associated with concurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalised patients in Ireland. Identifying and characterising this association in people who are socially excluded will inform VTE prevention and treatment strategies.
designRetrospective cross-sectional study.
settingIrish Hospital Inpatient Enquiry (HIPE) system, which collects diagnostic information by International Classification of Diseases Tenth Revision code on all hospital admission episodes in the Ireland.
participantsAll hospital admission episodes involving a VTE diagnosis (in a primary 'Dx 1' or secondary 'Dx 2-30' coding position) during a 12-month period in the Ireland were identified from consolidated, national-level datasets derived from the Irish HIPE system. Social exclusion was defined as the presence of one or more indicators of homelessness, drug use, incarceration, health hazards due to socioeconomic status or episodes of healthcare terminated prematurely.
resultsOf 5701 admission episodes involving a VTE diagnosis (in a primary or secondary position) during the study period, 271 (4.8%) related to an individual affected by social exclusion. Among hospitalised individuals identified as being socially excluded based on the novel composite variable, the likelihood of having a concurrent VTE diagnosis was over twofold greater than that observed in the general population (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.26; p<0.001).
conclusionThese data suggest that VTE (primary and secondary) is over-represented in hospitalised socially excluded persons in Ireland and that the development of strategies to address this potentially life-threatening accompanying condition in this vulnerable patient group must be prioritised.
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.