ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2026
External validation of the Intermountain Risk Scores for postdischarge thrombosis and bleeding in an independent population.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Extended thromboprophylaxis after medical hospitalization has not consistently shown benefit, largely due to increased bleeding events. Accurate prediction of postdischarge (PD) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding risk is therefore essential. The Intermountain Risk Scores (IMRSs) were developed to predict 90-day risks of these outcomes following discharge. Objectives: To assess the predictive performance and external validity of the IMRSs in an independent cohort. Methods: We retrospectively identified adults discharged alive from medical hospitalizations at an academic medical center between 2010 and 2019. PD VTE and bleeding events were identified using validated computable phenotypes. IMRSs were calculated using data at discharge, with missing data addressed via multiple imputation. We determined the observed risks of VTE and bleeding in our cohort for low- and high-risk patients and compared these with the corresponding risks reported in the original cohort and evaluated model discrimination by estimating the time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: Among 14,556 discharges, 108 PD VTE and 373 PD bleeding events occurred within 90 days. The observed risk for high-risk and low-risk categories was 0.9% and 0.5% for VTE (hazard ratio 1.51; 95% CI, 0.88-2.59) and 4.2% and 1.8% for bleeding (hazard ratio 2.51; 95% CI, 2.04-3.08), respectively. Discrimination was poor for both outcomes (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.55 for VTE; 0.60 for bleeding). Conclusion: The IMRSs demonstrated limited discrimination in this external cohort. These findings suggest that the IMRSs may not be generalizable to all medical populations and highlight the need for more robust risk-stratification tools.
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.