Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39215514›Full record

ArticleClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis

Development of a Risk Assessment Tool for Venous Thromboembolism among Hospitalized Patients in the ICU.

Chuanlin Zhang, Jie Mi, Xueqin Wang, Ruiying Gan, Xinyi Luo, Zhi Nie, Xiaoya Chen, Zeju Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Chuanlin ZhangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, PR China.
Jie MiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, PR China.ORCID 0000-0002-5508-2846
Xueqin WangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, PR China.
Ruiying GanDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, PR China.
Xinyi LuoDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, PR China.
Zhi NieDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, PR China.
Xiaoya ChenDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, PR China.
Zeju ZhangSchool of Nursing, Chongqing Medical and Pharmaceutical College, Chongqing, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundICU patients have a high incidence of VTE. The American College of Chest Physicians antithrombotic practice guidelines recommend assessing the risk of VTE in all ICU patients. Although several VTE risk assessment tools exist to evaluate the risk factors among hospitalized patients, there is no validated tool specifically for assessing the risk of VTE in ICU patients.

methodsA retrospective corhort study was conducted between June 2018 and October 2022. We obtained data from the electronic medical records of patients with a variety of diagnoses admitted to a mixed ICU. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the independent risk factors of VTE. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to analyse the predictive accuracy of different tools.

resultsA total of 566 patients were included, and VTE occurred in 89 patients (15.7%), 62.9% was asymptomatic VTE. A prediction model (the ICU-VTE prediction model) was derived from the independent risk factors identified using multivariate analysis. The ICU-VTE prediction model included eight independent risk factors: history of VTE (3 points), immobilization ≥4 days (3 points), multiple trauma (3 points), age ≥70 years (2 points), platelet count >250 × 10

conclusionsWe identified eight independent risk factors for acquired VTE among hospitalized patients in the ICU, deriving a new ICU-VTE risk assessment model. The model aims to predict asymptomatic VTE in ICU patients. The new model has higher predictive accuracy than the current tools. A prospective study is required for external validation of the tool and risk stratification in ICU patients.

Indexed as

Intensive Care UnitsVenous ThromboembolismAgedFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk Factorsdeep vein thrombosisintensive care unitprediction modelpulmonary embolismrisk factorvenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID39215514
PMCPMC11367689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.