ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2026
The COMPASS-CAT risk assessment model for predicting in-hospital venous thromboembolism in patients with breast, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo assess the predictive accuracy of the comparison of methods for thromboembolic risk assessment with clinical perceptions and awareness in real-life patients with cancer-associated thrombosis (COMPASS-CAT) risk model against the established Khorana score for predicting in-hospital venous thromboembolism in patients with solid tumors.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed 482 inpatients with breast, lung, colorectal, or ovarian cancer. Venous thromboembolism risk was stratified using the COMPASS-CAT and Khorana scores. The primary outcome was objectively verified in-hospital venous thromboembolism. Discriminative performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.ResultsOf the 482 patients, 53 (11.0%) developed in-hospital venous thromboembolism. The COMPASS-CAT model (score ≥7) demonstrated higher specificity (98.13% vs. 81.77%) and positive predictive value (82.22% vs. 35.00%) compared with the Khorana score (score ≥2). The COMPASS-CAT model exhibited significantly better overall discrimination, with an area under the curve of 0.913 versus 0.695 for the Khorana score (p < 0.001). Univariate logistic regression revealed that a COMPASS-CAT score ≥7 was strongly associated with elevated venous thromboembolism risk (odds ratio = 20.66, 95% confidence interval: 9.96-42.83). A Khorana score ≥2 was also associated with an increased risk, but the magnitude was weaker (odds ratio = 3.26).ConclusionThe COMPASS-CAT model exhibited a promising discriminative trend over the Khorana score for identifying the risk of in-hospital venous thromboembolism. Its notably higher specificity and positive predictive value suggest that it may serve as a helpful supplementary tool for targeted thromboprophylaxis in the inpatient oncology setting.
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.