Skip to main content

Table 2 Results of failure-rate and efficiency in 2 scenarios at different cut-off values of the Wells-rule in comparison with results of the Christopher-study.

From: Excluding pulmonary embolism in primary care using the Wells-rule in combination with a point-of care D-dimer test: a scenario analysis

Wells

N=

Prevalence PE

SimpliRed:

Sens 85%

Spec 74%

Simplify:

Sens 87%

Spec 62%

Christopher 2006 Tinaquant/Vidas

   

Failure-rate (95% CI)

Efficiency

Failure-rate (95% CI)

Efficiency

Failure-rate (95% CI)

Efficiency

≤ 4

1876

12.0% (226/1876)

2.7% (1.9-3.8%)

46.5%

2.8% (1.9-3.9%)

38.9%

0.5% (0.2-1.2%)

35.0%

≤ 3

1772

11.3% (201/1772)

2.5% (1.7-3.6%)

44.2%

2.6% (1.7-3.8%)

37.0%

0.4% (0.1-1.1%)

34.1%

≤ 2

919

6.3% (58/919)

1.4% (0.6-2.6%)

23.9%

1.5% (0.6-2.9%)

20.1%

0.2% (0.0-1.0%)

19.8%

<2

915

6.3% (58/915)

1.4%(0.6-2.6%)

23.8%

1.5% (0.6-2.9%)

20.0%

0.2%(0.0-1.0%)

19.8%

≤ 1

611

4.6% (28/611)

0.9% (0.3-2.3%)

16.1%

1.1% (0.3-2.8%)

13.5%

0.0% (0.0-1.0%)

14.5%

0

559

4.3% (24/559)

1.0% (0.3-2.6%)

14.8%

0.9% (0.2-2.6%)

12.4%

0.0% (0.0-1.0%)

13.8%

  1. N = Number of outpatients in different Wells clinical probability groups
  2. CI = Confidence interval