ReviewSeminars in thrombosis and hemostasis2024
The History of Diagnosing Venous Thromboembolism.
Review in Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cerebral venous thrombosis in non-bacterial infections: a systematic review.BMC neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Transcriptomic Profiling and WGCNA Identify ALOX5 as a Key Regulator of Iron Metabolism and Immune Crosstalk in Venous Thromboembolism.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of deep vein thrombosis in elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An accurate and prompt diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism is important to prevent serious complications and mortality. Because the clinical presentation of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is often nonspecific, objective testing by means of radiological imaging is required to confirm the diagnosis. Historically, a diagnosis of VTE involved invasive imaging techniques like contrast venography or conventional pulmonary angiography. Technological developments toward more accurate and less invasive diagnostics have driven the implementation of a variety of newer technologies over the past decades, as well as the derivation and validation of clinical decision rules (CDRs) that can be used to rule out VTE in combination with D-dimer blood tests. In this narrative review, we provide a historical overview of the most notable developments in the imaging techniques and CDRs for VTE diagnosis.
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.