Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39252910›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024

What Constitutes High Risk for Venous Thromboembolism? Comparing Approaches to Determining an Appropriate Threshold.

Benjamin G Mittman, Bo Hu, Rebecca Schulte, Phuc Le, Matthew A Pappas, Aaron Hamilton, Michael B Rothberg

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Benjamin G MittmanCenter for Value-Based Care Research, Community Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7721-5822
Bo HuDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Rebecca SchulteDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Phuc LeCenter for Value-Based Care Research, Community Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Matthew A PappasCenter for Value-Based Care Research, Community Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0353-1785
Aaron HamiltonDepartment of Hospital Medicine, Integrated Hospital Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6244-0840
Michael B RothbergCenter for Value-Based Care Research, Community Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2063-1876

Funding

MEDICAL SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM007250 · NIGMS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI HUANG, ALEX YEE-CHEN · 1985 to 2023
$33.4M
Medical Scientist Training Program at Case Western Reserve UniversityT32GM152319 · NIGMS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI Heather Broihier, Alex Yee-Chen Huang · 2024 to 2026
$5.1M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002549 · NCATS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI HARDING, CLIFFORD V · 2018 to 2022
$2.9M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002549NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007250NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM152319
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Guidelines recommend pharmacological venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis only for high-risk patients, but the probability of VTE considered "high-risk" is not specified. Our objective was to define an appropriate probability threshold (or range) for VTE risk stratification and corresponding prophylaxis in medical inpatients. Methods: Patients were adults admitted to any of 10 Cleveland Clinic Health System hospitals between December 2020 and August 2021 (N = 41,036). Hospital medicine physicians and internal medicine residents from included hospitals were surveyed between June and November 2023 (N = 214). We compared five approaches to determining a threshold: decision analysis, maximizing the sensitivity and specificity of a logistic regression model, deriving a probability from a point-based model, surveying physicians' understanding of VTE risk, and deriving a probability from physician behavior. For each approach, we determined the probability threshold above which a patient would be considered high-risk for VTE. We applied each threshold to the Cleveland Clinic VTE risk assessment model (CCM) and calculated the percentage of the 41,036 patients in our cohort who would be considered eligible for prophylaxis due to their high-risk status. We compared these hypothetical prophylaxis rates with physicians' observed prophylaxis rates. Results: The different approaches yielded thresholds ranging from 0.3% to 5.4%, corresponding inversely with hypothetical prophylaxis rates of 0.2% to 75%. Multiple thresholds clustered between 0.52% to 0.55%, suggesting an average hypothetical prophylaxis rate of approximately 30%, whereas physicians' observed prophylaxis rates ranged from 48% to 76%. Conclusions: Multiple approaches to determining a probability threshold for VTE prophylaxis converged to suggest an optimal threshold of approximately 0.5%. Other approaches yielded extreme thresholds that are unrealistic for clinical practice. Physicians prescribed prophylaxis much more frequently than the suggested rate of 30%, indicating opportunity to reduce unnecessary prophylaxis. To aid in these efforts, guidelines should explicitly quantify high-risk.

Indexed as

clinical decision support systemsdecision analysisprobabilityrisk assessmentvenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID39252910
PMCPMC11383466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.