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