Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prospective validation of the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index: A clinical prognostic model for pulmonary embolism

Gal, Grégoire, Fine, Michael J., Roy, Pierre-Marie, Sanchez, Olivier, Verschuren, Franck, Cornuz, Jacques, Meyer, Guy, Perrier, Arnaud, Righini, Marc, Aujesky, Drahomir, Donzé, Jacques·2008·Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Abstract

Summary: Practice guidelines recommend outpatient care for selected patients with non-massive pulmonary embolism (PE), but fail to specify how these low-risk patients should be identified. Using data from U.S. patients, we previously derived the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI), a prediction rule that risk stratifies patients with PE. We sought to validate the PESI in a European patient cohort. We prospectively validated the PESI in patients with PE diagnosed at six emergency departments in three European countries. We used baseline data for the rule’s 11 prognostic variables to stratify patients into five risk classes (I-V) of increasing probability of mortality. The outcome was overall mortality at 90 days after presentation.To assess the accuracy of the PESI to predict mortality, we estimated the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values for low- (risk classes I/II) versus higher- risk patients (risk classes III-V), and the discriminatory power using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Among 357 patients with PE, overall mortality was 5.9%, ranging from 0% in class I to 17.9% in class V. The 186 (52%) low-risk patients had an overall mortality of 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1–3.8%) compared to 11.1% (95% CI: 6.8–16.8%) in the 171 (48%) higher- risk patients. The PESI had a high sensitivity (91%,95% CI: 71–97%) and a negative predictive value (99%, 95% CI: 96–100%) for predicting mortality. The area under the ROC curve was 0.78 (95% CI:0.70–0.86). The PESI reliably identifies patients with PE who are at low risk of death and who are potential candidates for outpatient care. The PESI may help physicians make more rational decisions about hospitalization for patients with PE.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1160/th08-05-0285

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
Gal, G., Fine, M. J., Roy, P.-M., Sanchez, O., Verschuren, F., Cornuz, J., Meyer, G., Perrier, A., Righini, M., Aujesky, D., & Donzé, J.
Venue
Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Published
2008
Volume
100
Issue
05
Pages
943-948
ISSN
  • 0340-6245 (ISSN-L)
  • 2567-689X
OpenAlex
W2083225817
Cited by
358
References
30
FWCI
8.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Prospective validation of the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index: A clinical prognostic model for pulmonary embolism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1160/th08-05-0285
The paper
Gal, G., Fine, M. J., Roy, P.-M., Sanchez, O., Verschuren, F., Cornuz, J., Meyer, G., Perrier, A., Righini, M., Aujesky, D., & Donzé, J. (2008). Prospective validation of the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index: A clinical prognostic model for pulmonary embolism. Thrombosis and Haemostasis. https://doi.org/10.1160/th08-05-0285

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.