ArticleScientific reports2026
Development and internal validation of a clinical prediction model for venous thromboembolism in patients with renal insufficiency.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Renal insufficiency (RI) patients have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but validated risk assessment models tailored to this population are scarce. We conducted this study to provide a personalized VTE risk assessment for patients with RI. A total of 698 patients with RI hospitalized at the First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from January 2022 to December 2023 were included in the study, including 142 with VTE and 556 without. Multiple imputation techniques and the Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique were used to address the missing data and class imbalance, respectively. We used LASSO regression, random forest, and bidirectional stepwise logistic regression for feature selection and developed a logistic regression prediction model for VTE in RI patients. We identified age, length of hospital stays, lower mean arterial pressure, previous VTE, fever, lower limb pain, higher RDW-CV, D-dimer, and central venous catheterization as independent predictors for VTE in RI. The model demonstrated good discrimination and calibration, with a sensitivity of 0.79, specificity of 0.74, AUC of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.80-0.85), F1 score of 0.77, and Brier score of 0.17. The Spiegelhalter Z-test showed a p-value of 0.556, and decision curve analysis confirmed clinical applicability. Internal validation with Bootstrap resamples affirmed its stability. Our model helps identify high-risk individuals who may benefit from thromboprophylaxis. Large-scale, multicenter studies are needed to validate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.