MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212920404 · doi:10.1136/bmj-2021-067378

Diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis with D-dimer adjusted to clinical probability: prospective diagnostic management study

2022· article· en· W4212920404 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Clive Kearon, Kerstin de Wit, Sameer Parpia, Sam Schulman, Frederick A. Spencer, Sangita Sharma, Marc Afilalo, Susan R. Kahn, Grégoire Le Gal, Sudeep Shivakumar, Shannon M. Bates, Cynthia Wu, Alejandro Lazo‐Langner, Frédérick D’Aragon, Jean-François Deshaies, Luciana Spadafora, Jim A. Julian

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie UniversityUniversity of OttawaJewish General HospitalOntario Clinical Oncology GroupUniversité de SherbrookeQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityMcGill UniversityImpact
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster UniversityHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineD-dimerConfidence intervalPre- and post-test probabilityDeep veinThrombosisProspective cohort studyRadiologyEmergency departmentVenous thrombosisSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To evaluate the safety and efficiency of a diagnostic algorithm for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) that uses clinical pretest probability based D-dimer thresholds to exclude DVT. Design Prospective diagnostic management study. Setting University based emergency departments or outpatient clinics in Canada. Participants Patients with symptoms or signs of DVT. Intervention DVT was considered excluded without further testing by Wells low clinical pretest probability and D-dimer <1000 ng/mL or Wells moderate clinical pretest probability and D-dimer <500 ng/mL. All other patients had proximal ultrasound imaging. Repeat proximal ultrasonography was restricted to patients with initially negative ultrasonography, low or moderate clinical pretest probability, and D-dimer >3000 ng/mL or high clinical pretest probability and D-dimer >1500 ng/mL. If DVT was not diagnosed, patients did not receive anticoagulant treatment. Main outcome measure Symptomatic venous thromboembolism at three months. Results 1508 patients were enrolled and analysed, of whom 173 (11.5%) had DVT on scheduled diagnostic testing. Of the 1275 patients with no proximal DVT on scheduled testing who did not receive anticoagulant treatment, eight (0.6%, 95% confidence interval 0.3% to 1.2%) were found to have venous thromboembolism during follow-up. Compared with a traditional DVT testing strategy, this diagnostic approach reduced the need for ultrasonography from a mean of 1.36 scans/patient to 0.72 scans/patient (difference −0.64, 95% confidence interval −0.68 to −0.60), corresponding to a relative reduction of 47%. Conclusions The diagnostic strategy using a combination of clinical pretest probability and D-dimer identified a group of patients at low risk for DVT during follow-up while substantially reducing the need for ultrasound imaging. Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02038530 .

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207