ArticleBiomolecules & biomedicine2024
Prediction of mortality in patients with secondary pulmonary embolism based on primary admission indication: A short communication.
Article in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Development and Validation of a Risk Prediction Model for Secondary Pulmonary Infarction in Elderly Patients With Acute Pulmonary Embolism].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 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
We evaluated the prediction of mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) who subsequently developed a pulmonary embolism (PE) (i.e., secondary PE) using three PE-specific scores, the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI), simplified PESI (sPESI), and modified sPESI (ICU-sPESI) and compared them to the gold standard for the assessment of ICU all-cause mortality, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV (APACHE-IV). All critical care admission indications were grouped into four major categories: post-operative, cardiovascular, infectious (sepsis), and other. The APACHE-IV displayed better discriminative ability to predict in-hospital mortality than the PESI and ICU-sPESI, but these two scores still performed fair for the ICU admissions related to postoperative, cardiovascular, and other admission types. Meanwhile, the sPESI displayed poor predictive performance across all four admission categories. Notably, discriminatory performance for patients with an infection-related admission was consistently low regardless of which score was used.
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.