Diagnosis and Management of Isolated Subsegmental Pulmonary Embolism: Review and Assessment of the Options
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We assessed the potential safety of withholding treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE) limited to subsegmental branches. Literature review showed that untreated patients with mostly subsegmental PE had no fatal recurrences in 1 to 3 months and no nonfatal recurrences of PE in 3 months. Patients with suspected PE who had nondiagnostic ventilation/perfusion lung scans, adequate cardiorespiratory reserve or low or moderate clinical probability, and negative serial noninvasive leg tests were shown not to require treatment. It appears safe, therefore, to withhold treatment of subsegmental PE providing (1) pulmonary-respiratory reserve is good; (2) no evidence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) on serial testing; (3) major risk factor for PE was transient and no longer present; (4) no history of central venous catheterization or atrial fibrillation; and (5) willingness to return for serial venous ultrasound. After fully informing patients, some may choose to be treated and some may choose not to be treated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".