These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search


248 related items for PubMed ID: 15081559

  • 1. Practical utility of clinical prediction rules for suspected acute pulmonary embolism in a large academic institution.
    Moores LK, Collen JF, Woods KM, Shorr AF.
    Thromb Res; 2004; 113(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 15081559
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Effect of patient location on the performance of clinical models to predict pulmonary embolism.
    Ollenberger GP, Worsley DF.
    Thromb Res; 2006; 118(6):685-90. PubMed ID: 16380153
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Comparison of the unstructured clinician estimate of pretest probability for pulmonary embolism to the Canadian score and the Charlotte rule: a prospective observational study.
    Runyon MS, Webb WB, Jones AE, Kline JA.
    Acad Emerg Med; 2005 Jul; 12(7):587-93. PubMed ID: 15995088
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Potential impact of adjusting the threshold of the quantitative D-dimer based on pretest probability of acute pulmonary embolism.
    Kabrhel C, Mark Courtney D, Camargo CA, Moore CL, Richman PB, Plewa MC, Nordenholtz KE, Smithline HA, Beam DM, Brown MD, Kline JA.
    Acad Emerg Med; 2009 Apr; 16(4):325-32. PubMed ID: 19298619
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Simplification of the revised Geneva score for assessing clinical probability of pulmonary embolism.
    Klok FA, Mos IC, Nijkeuter M, Righini M, Perrier A, Le Gal G, Huisman MV.
    Arch Intern Med; 2008 Oct 27; 168(19):2131-6. PubMed ID: 18955643
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Outcomes of high pretest probability patients undergoing d-dimer testing for pulmonary embolism: a pilot study.
    Kabrhel C.
    J Emerg Med; 2008 Nov 27; 35(4):373-7. PubMed ID: 18343077
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. [Comparison of three clinical prediction rules among patients with suspected pulmonary embolism].
    Ulukavak Ciftçi T, Köktürk N, Demir N, Oğuzülgen KI, Ekim N.
    Tuberk Toraks; 2005 Nov 27; 53(3):252-8. PubMed ID: 16258884
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Validity and clinical utility of the simplified Wells rule for assessing clinical probability for the exclusion of pulmonary embolism.
    Douma RA, Gibson NS, Gerdes VE, Büller HR, Wells PS, Perrier A, Le Gal G.
    Thromb Haemost; 2009 Jan 27; 101(1):197-200. PubMed ID: 19132208
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients probability of pulmonary embolism: increasing the models utility with the SimpliRED D-dimer.
    Wells PS, Anderson DR, Rodger M, Ginsberg JS, Kearon C, Gent M, Turpie AG, Bormanis J, Weitz J, Chamberlain M, Bowie D, Barnes D, Hirsh J.
    Thromb Haemost; 2000 Mar 27; 83(3):416-20. PubMed ID: 10744147
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Performance of the Wells and Revised Geneva scores for predicting pulmonary embolism.
    Calisir C, Yavas US, Ozkan IR, Alatas F, Cevik A, Ergun N, Sahin F.
    Eur J Emerg Med; 2009 Feb 27; 16(1):49-52. PubMed ID: 18931619
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Comparison of the Wells and Revised Geneva Scores for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: an Australian experience.
    Wong DD, Ramaseshan G, Mendelson RM.
    Intern Med J; 2011 Mar 27; 41(3):258-63. PubMed ID: 20214691
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Comparison of a clinical probability estimate and two clinical models in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. ANTELOPE-Study Group.
    Sanson BJ, Lijmer JG, Mac Gillavry MR, Turkstra F, Prins MH, Büller HR.
    Thromb Haemost; 2000 Feb 27; 83(2):199-203. PubMed ID: 10739372
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside with low pre-test probability and D-dimer: safety and clinical utility of 4 methods to assign pre-test probability.
    Carrier M, Wells PS, Rodger MA.
    Thromb Res; 2006 Feb 27; 117(4):469-74. PubMed ID: 15893807
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. The contribution of the subjective component of the Canadian Pulmonary Embolism Score to the overall score in emergency department patients.
    Kabrhel C, McAfee AT, Goldhaber SZ.
    Acad Emerg Med; 2005 Oct 27; 12(10):915-20. PubMed ID: 16204134
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Assessment of pretest probability of pulmonary embolism in the emergency department by physicians in training using the Wells model.
    Penaloza A, Mélot C, Dochy E, Blocklet D, Gevenois PA, Wautrecht JC, Lheureux P, Motte S.
    Thromb Res; 2007 Oct 27; 120(2):173-9. PubMed ID: 17055556
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Positive Pulmonary Computed Tomography Angiography in Patients with Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Clinical Prediction Rules, Thromboembolic Risk Factors, and Implications for Appropriate Use.
    Vongchaiudomchoke T, Boonyasirinant T.
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2016 Jan 27; 99(1):25-33. PubMed ID: 27455821
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Performance of the Wells score in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism during hospitalization: a delayed-type cross sectional study in a community hospital.
    Posadas-Martínez ML, Vázquez FJ, Giunta DH, Waisman GD, de Quirós FG, Gándara E.
    Thromb Res; 2014 Feb 27; 133(2):177-81. PubMed ID: 24342535
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Comparison of the Wells score with the simplified revised Geneva score for assessing pretest probability of pulmonary embolism.
    Penaloza A, Melot C, Motte S.
    Thromb Res; 2011 Feb 27; 127(2):81-4. PubMed ID: 21094985
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. [Clinical probability of PE: should we use a clinical prediction rule?].
    Le Gal G, Righini M, Perrier A.
    Rev Pneumol Clin; 2008 Dec 27; 64(6):269-75. PubMed ID: 19084205
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]


    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 13.