The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Incidence of diagnosed deep vein thrombosis in the general population: Systematic review
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE to determine the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the general population by pooling results from all studies of adequate quality. DESIGN systematic review including meta-analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS MEDLINE (1966-2001) and EMBASE (1950-2001) were searched for studies on the incidence of DVTand thromboembolism in the general population. Studies had to attain minimum inclusion and quality criteria to be accepted for the review, including adequate specification of the diagnosis of DVT and the age range of the population. The appraisal of studies for inclusion and abstraction of data were carried out independently by each author. Incidence rates were adjusted to standardise for differences between studies in categories of DVT and population age structures. Weighted and unweighted means of incidence per 10 000 person years were estimated. RESULTS nine studies were identified which fulfilled the inclusion and quality criteria. Most were conducted in Sweden or U.S.A. between 1976 and 2000. The weighted mean incidence of first DVT in the whole general population was 5.04 (95% CI 4.70, 5.38) per 10 000 person years. The incidence was similar in males and females and increased dramatically with age from about 2-3 per 10 000 person years at age 30-49 to 20 per 10 000 person years at age 70-79. Around 40% of cases of DVT were idiopathic. CONCLUSION this study provides the most comprehensive estimate to date of the incidence of DVT in the whole general population-around 5 per 10 000 per annum-and is a useful background figure for comparison with incidence in high risk groups.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
World Health Organization Collaborative Study of Cardiovascular Disease and Steroid Hormone Contarception (1995) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)91926-0 · Cited by 631
Cited by
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2010 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
WRITING GROUP MEMBERS, Lloyd-Jones, D., Adams, R. J., Brown, T. M., Carnethon, M., Dai, S., De Simone, G., Ferguson, T. B., Ford, E., Furie, K., et al. (2010) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.109.192667 · Cited by 5,700
Rosamond, W., Flegal, K., Friday, G., Furie, K., Go, A., Greenlund, K., Haase, N., Ho, M., Howard, V., Kissela, B., et al. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.179918 · Cited by 3,277
WRITING GROUP MEMBERS, Lloyd-Jones, D., Adams, R., Carnethon, M., De Simone, G., Ferguson, T. B., Flegal, K., Ford, E., Furie, K., Go, A., et al. (2009) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.108.191261 · Cited by 3,140
Evaluation of the Quality of Prognosis Studies in Systematic Reviews
Hayden, J. A., Côté, P., & Bombardier, C. (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-6-200603210-00010 · Cited by 1,452
Kyrle, P. A., & Eichinger, S. (2005) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(05)71880-8 · Cited by 616
Metadata
- Authors
- Fowkes, F. J. I., Price, J. F., & Fowkes, F. G. R.
- Venue
- European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-5
- ISSN
- 1078-5884 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1986073703
- Cited by
- 383
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Incidence of diagnosed deep vein thrombosis in the general population: Systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1053/ejvs.2002.1778
- The paper
- Fowkes, F. J. I., Price, J. F., & Fowkes, F. G. R. (2003). Incidence of diagnosed deep vein thrombosis in the general population: Systematic review. European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1053/ejvs.2002.1778
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.