Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

Systematic review of prognostic models for recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) post-treatment of first unprovoked VTE

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Ensor, Joie, Riley, Richard D., Moore, David, Snell, Kym I. E., Bayliss, Susan and Fitzmaurice, David A. (2016) Systematic review of prognostic models for recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) post-treatment of first unprovoked VTE. BMJ Open, 6 (5). e011190. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011190

[img]
Preview
PDF
WRAP-systematic-review-prognostic-models-Fitzmaurice-2017.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer.
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Download (1764Kb) | Preview
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011190

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Objectives: To review studies developing or validating a prognostic model for individual venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence risk following cessation of therapy for a first unprovoked VTE. Prediction of recurrence risk is crucial to informing patient prognosis and treatment decisions. The review aims to determine whether reliable prognostic models exist and, if not, what further research is needed within the field.

Design: Bibliographic databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library) were searched using index terms relating to the clinical field and prognosis. Screening of titles, abstracts and subsequently full texts was conducted by 2 reviewers independently using predefined criteria. Quality assessment and critical appraisal of included full texts was based on an early version of the PROBAST (Prediction study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool) for risk of bias and applicability in prognostic model studies.

Setting: Studies in any setting were included.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome for the review was the predictive accuracy of identified prognostic models in relation to VTE recurrence risk.

Results: 3 unique prognostic models were identified including the HERDOO2 score, Vienna prediction model and DASH score. Quality assessment highlighted the Vienna, and DASH models were developed with generally strong methodology, but the HERDOO2 model had many methodological concerns. Further, all models were considered at least at moderate risk of bias, primarily due to the need for further external validation before use in practice.

Conclusions: Although the Vienna model shows the most promise (based on strong development methodology, applicability and having some external validation), none of the models can be considered ready for use until further, external and robust validation is performed in new data. Any new models should consider the inclusion of predictors found to be consistently important in existing models (sex, site of index event, D-dimer), and take heed of several methodological issues identified through this review.

Item Type: Journal Article
Subjects: R Medicine > RC Internal medicine
Divisions: Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Clinical Trials Unit
Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences
Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): Thromboembolism -- Prognosis , Systematic reviews (Medical research)
Journal or Publication Title: BMJ Open
Publisher: BMJ
ISSN: 2044-6055
Official Date: 1 May 2016
Dates:
DateEvent
1 May 2016Published
6 May 2016Available
4 April 2016Accepted
Volume: 6
Number: 5
Article Number: e011190
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011190
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Access rights to Published version: Open Access
RIOXX Funder/Project Grant:
Project/Grant IDRIOXX Funder NameFunder ID
10/94/02Health Technology Assessment programmehttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000664

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us