Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39640909›Full record

ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2024

External validation of the Leiden Thrombosis Recurrence Risk Prediction models (L-TRRiP) for the prediction of recurrence after a first venous thrombosis in the Heart and Vascular Health study.

J Louise I Burggraaf-van Delft, Kerri L Wiggins, Nienke van Rein, Saskia le Cessie, Nicholas L Smith, Suzanne C Cannegieter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 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

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

6 authors.

J Louise I Burggraaf-van DelftDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Kerri L WigginsDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Nienke van ReinDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Saskia le CessieDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Nicholas L SmithDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Suzanne C CannegieterDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Long-term outcome after a first venous thromboembolism (VTE) might be optimized by tailoring anticoagulant treatment duration on individual risks of recurrence and major bleeding. The L-TRRiP models (A-D) were previously developed in data from the Dutch Multiple Environment and Genetic Assessment of Risk Factors for Venous thrombosis study to predict VTE recurrence. Objectives: We aimed to externally validate models C and D using data from the United States Heart and Vascular Health (HVH) study. Methods: Data from participants with a first VTE who discontinued initial anticoagulant therapy were used to determine model performance. Missing data were imputed, and results were pooled according to Rubin's rules. To determine discrimination, Harrell's C-statistic was calculated. To assess calibration, the observed/expected (O/E) ratio was estimated, and calibration plots were created, in which we accounted for the competing risk of death. A stratified analysis based on age <70 or >70 years was performed. Results: Of 1430 participants from the HVH study, 187 experienced an unprovoked VTE recurrence during follow-up. The C-statistics of L-TRRIP models C and D were 0.62 (95% CI, 0.56-0.67) and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.55-0.67), respectively. The O/E ratio (1.00; 95% CI, 0.84-1.17 and 1.09; 95% CI, 0.91-1.27, respectively) and calibration plots indicated good calibration. The discrimination was similar between participants <70 or >70 years, whereas overall calibration was lower in participants <70 years. Conclusion: The L-TRRiP models showed moderate discrimination and good calibration in a different population and can be used to guide clinical decision making. To assess the added value in daily clinical practice, a management study is needed.

Indexed as

anticoagulantsclinical decision rulesprognosisvalidation studyvenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID39640909
PMCPMC11617231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.