SynthesisPloS one2024
The effect of obligatory Padua prediction scoring in hospitalized medically ill patients: A retrospective cohort study.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Associated Infections on the Clinical Course and Risk-Stratification Profile of Pulmonary Embolism: Comparative Analysis Using PESI, Wells, Padua, and IMPROVE Scores.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Risk Stratification in Pulmonary Embolism: Prognostic Value of PESI, WELLS, PADUA, and IMPROVE Scores in Relation to Laboratory Markers.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Prophylactic vs. Intermediate Tinzaparin Dosage for the Thromboprophylaxis of Acutely Ill Medical Patients at High Risk of Venous Thromboembolism.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Do Decision Support Tools Decrease the Prevalence of Hospital-Acquired Venous Thromboembolisms When Compared to Clinical Judgement? A Single-Center Pre-Post Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is considered a preventable cause of mortality. The evidence for the benefit of VTE prophylaxis in acute medical patients is non-conclusive. Meta-analysis of RCTs failed to demonstrate reduction of all-cause mortality, while showing higher risk of bleeding. The Israeli Ministry of Health has instructed to assess all acute medical patients for the risk for VTE using the Padua Prediction Score, without mandating prophylaxis.
aimTo evaluate the effect of filling the Padua score on clinical outcomes and VTE prophylaxis rates.
methodsRetrospective Study was performed in Israel during the years 2014-2017. The participants were divided to Padua compliance vs non-compliance group. Primary outcome: 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes: 90-day incidence of VTE and suspected major bleeding. A propensity-weighted logistic multiple regression was performed.
results18,890 patients were included in the study. The fulfillment of the Padua score was associated with an increased use of VTE prophylaxis, OR 1.66 (95% CI 1.49-1.84). However, there was no reduction of mortality or VTE events, OR 1.13 (95% CI 0.97-1.31) and OR 1.22 (95% CI 0.79-1.8) respectively. Hospitalizations related to hemoglobin decrease were not statistically different between the two groups.
conclusionsPadua score for the assessment of VTE risk in medical wards was associated with higher administration of pharmacological prophylaxis without reduction in VTE or mortality rate. Its usage should be reassessed as a performance measure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.