Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Thromb Haemost. 2000 Feb;83(2):199-203.

Comparison of a clinical probability estimate and two clinical models in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. ANTELOPE-Study Group.

Author information

  • 1Department of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. b.j.sanson@amc.uva.nl

Abstract

Recent studies have suggested that both the subjective judgement of a physician and standardized clinical models can be helpful in the estimation of the probability of the disease in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). We performed a multi-center study in consecutive in- and outpatients with suspected PE to compare the potential diagnostic utility of these methods. Of the 517 study patients, 160 (31%) were classified as having PE. Of these patients, 14% had a low probability as estimated by the treating physician, while 25 to 36% were categorized as having a low clinical probability with the use of two previously described clinical models. The objectively confirmed prevalence of PE in these three low probability categories was 19%, 28% and 28%, respectively. The three methods yielded comparable predictive values for PE in the other probability categories. We conclude that a physician's clinical judgement alone and two standardized clinical models, although comparable, perform disappointingly in categorizing the pre-test probability in patients with suspected PE.

Comment in

PMID:
10739372
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Schattauer Verlag
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk