Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40821746›Full record

ReviewResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2025

R

Aman Goyal, Sonia Hurjkaliani, Kevin Michael Alexander, Jianfeng Xu, Manan Pareek, Arman Qamar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

6 authors.

Aman GoyalDepartment of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Sonia HurjkalianiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan.
Kevin Michael AlexanderDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Jianfeng XuDivision for Personalized Cancer Care, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA.
Manan PareekDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Center for Translational Cardiology and Pragmatic Randomized Trials, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Arman QamarCardiovascular Personalize Medicine Program, Section of Interventional Cardiology and Vascular Medicine, Endeavor Health (NorthShore University Health System), University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, Glenview, Illinois, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant global health concern, with >1 million cases annually in the United States, making it a leading cause of preventable hospital-related deaths. Advances in genetic research, particularly genome-wide association studies, have demonstrated the polygenic nature of VTE by identifying numerous single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with susceptibility. The polygenic risk score (PRS), which aggregates the effects of multiple single-nucleotide polymorphisms, has emerged as a valuable tool for improving VTE risk assessment. Recent studies have demonstrated that PRS significantly improves VTE risk prediction beyond traditional clinical factors. Integrating genetic and clinical data enhances predictive accuracy, with individuals at high risk identified by PRS showing nearly 8 times the VTE risk of those at low risk. Additionally, PRS models have been developed to predict VTE risk in various predisposing conditions, including malignancies, cardiometabolic disorders, and pulmonary hypertension. These findings indicate that PRS could inform thromboprophylaxis decisions for high-risk patients. Further evidence indicates that PRS improves VTE risk prediction, even in individuals without conventional risk factors, such as family history or lifestyle contributors. The future of PRS in VTE risk stratification is promising, offering refined risk assessment, optimized anticoagulation management, and tailored thromboprophylaxis. However, challenges persist, including the development of multiancestry PRS models to enhance predictive accuracy across diverse populations. Continued research and validation will be essential to unlocking the full clinical potential of PRS in VTE management.

Indexed as

cardiologygeneticspolygenic risk scoreprecision medicinevenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID40821746
PMCPMC12356012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-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.