MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

In suspected PE, an age-adjusted <scp>D</scp>-dimer cutpoint improved ability to exclude PE

2014· letter· en· W2054117938 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eddy Lang

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineD-dimerPulmonary embolismInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ACP Journal Club15 July 2014In suspected PE, an age-adjusted D-dimer cutpoint improved ability to exclude PEEddy Lang, MDEddy Lang, MDUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada (E.L.)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-161-2-201407150-02013 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Source CitationRighini M, Van Es J, Den Exter PL, et al. Age-adjusted D-dimer cutoff levels to rule out pulmonary embolism: the ADJUST-PE study. JAMA. 2014;311:1117-24. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24643601Clinical Impact RatingsEmergency Med: Hospitalists: Hematology: Critical Care: References1 Torres-Macho J, Mancebo-Plaza AB, Crespo-Giménez A, et al. Clinical features of patients inappropriately undiagnosed of pulmonary embolism. Am J Emerg Med. 2013;31:1646-50. [PMID: 24060320] Google Scholar2 Huckins DS, Price LL, Gilley K. Utilization and yield of chest computed tomographic angiography associated with low positive D-dimer levels. J Emerg Med. 2012;43:211-20. [PMID: 21764536] Google Scholar3 Pasha SM, Klok FA, Snoep JD, et al. Safety of excluding acute pulmonary embolism based on an unlikely clinical probability by the Wells rule and normal D-dimer concentration: a meta-analysis. Thromb Res. 2010;125:e123-7. [PMID: 19942258] Google Scholar4 Linkins LA, Bates SM, Lang E, et al. Selective D-dimer testing for diagnosis of a first suspected episode of deep venous thrombosis: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:93-100. [PMID: 23318311] Google Scholar5 Schouten HJ, Geersing GJ, Koek HL, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of conventional or age adjusted D-dimer cut-off values in older patients with suspected venous thromboembolism: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;346:f2492. [PMID: 23645857] Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Eddy Lang, MDAffiliations: University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada (E.L.)This article was published at Annals.org on 1 July 2014. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byTromboembolismo pulmonar en pacientes con COVID-19: estudio de prevalencia en un hospital terciarioPulmonary embolisms in patients with COVID-19: A prevalence study in a tertiary hospital 15 July 2014Volume 161, Issue 2Page: JC13KeywordsD-dimerDeep vein thrombosisPatientsProspective studiesPulmonary embolismResearch fundingSpecificityThromboembolismThrombosisVenous thromboembolism ePublished: 15 July 2014 Issue Published: 15 July 2014 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2014 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal MedicineSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207