Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40020148›Full record

ArticleMedicine2025

Diagnostic accuracy of the Geneva clinical scale for diagnostic prediction of pulmonary embolism in adults aged 18 and older admitted between 2009 and 2020 with suspected pulmonary embolism at a Third-Level Institution in Colombia: A retrospective cohort study.

Cristian López-Vega, Michel Pérez-Garzón, Leonora Ortiz-García-Herreros, Alirio Bastidas-Goyes, Manuel Aramendiz-Narvaez, Estefan Ramos-Isaza, Henry Robayo-Amortegui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Pulmonary embolism consensus.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2026
    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

7 authors.

Cristian López-VegaIntensive Care, Clínica Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia.
Michel Pérez-GarzónDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Extracorporeal Life Support Unit (USVEC), Fundación Clínica Shaio, Bogotá D.C., Colombia.ORCID 0000-0001-9964-7151
Leonora Ortiz-García-HerrerosDepartment of Critical Medicine and Intensive Care, Fundación Clínica Shaio, Bogotá, Colombia.
Alirio Bastidas-GoyesSchool of Medicine, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Cundinamarca, Colombia.
Manuel Aramendiz-NarvaezSchool of Medicine, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Cundinamarca, Colombia.
Estefan Ramos-IsazaRadiology Resident, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Cundinamarca, Colombia.
Henry Robayo-AmorteguiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Extracorporeal Life Support Unit (USVEC), Fundación Clínica Shaio, Bogotá D.C., Colombia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To assess the overall applicability of the Geneva scale for diagnosing pulmonary embolism in adults aged 18 and older. A retrospective cohort study with diagnostic test analysis was conducted on patients in the emergency department or hospitalized between 2009 and 2020 with suspected pulmonary embolism at a Third-Level Institution in Colombia. Local study. The original and simplified Geneva scores were applied to 1237 subjects aged 18 and older with suspected pulmonary embolism and compared with confirmatory results from pulmonary angiography. All necessary variables for constructing the original and simplified Geneva rules were recorded, and calculations for sensitivity (S), specificity (E), likelihood ratios, and receiver operating characteristic curves were performed. The Geneva original score exhibited an S, E, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the curve of 60%, 54%, 1.3, 0.728, and 0.506, respectively. The simplified Geneva score showed 59%, 57%, 1.4, 0.7, and 0.546 for S, E, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the curve, respectively. The use of the original or simplified Geneva score in our population may not be useful for a diagnostic approach to pulmonary embolism. Both scales demonstrate almost negligible discriminatory capacity, necessitating the evaluation of other standardized clinical decision rules to assess the diagnosis and pretest probability of pulmonary thromboembolism.

Indexed as

Pulmonary EmbolismAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overColombiaEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40020148
PMCPMC11875587

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.