Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Systematic review and meta-analysis finds high VTE incidence in stroke patients and moderate model performance

Systematic review and meta-analysis finds high VTE incidence in stroke patients and moderate model p…
Photo by Navy Medicine / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Interpret VTE risk models in stroke cautiously due to high bias and no external validation.

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk prediction models in stroke patients. From 2,726 retrieved records, seven prediction models were included. The pooled VTE incidence across studies was 20.8% (95% CI: 14.7%–27.0%), with individual study incidences ranging from 9.8% to 38.9%. The pooled area under the curve (AUC) for model performance across six models was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81–0.93), with individual AUC values ranging from 0.781 to 0.978.

All seven included models were judged to be at high overall risk of bias according to the PROBAST tool. Notably, none of the models underwent independent external validation, which limits their generalizability. The authors highlight these limitations and note that the results should be interpreted with caution.

The review provides a reference for future model development and clinical research, but the high risk of bias and lack of external validation mean that current models are not yet ready for routine clinical use. Further validation in diverse stroke populations is needed before these tools can be recommended for practice.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
ObjectiveThis study aimed to systematically evaluate risk prediction models for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in stroke patients and to provide a reference for future model development and clinical research.MethodsA systematic search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, VIP, and SinoMed, to identify studies on VTE risk prediction models in stroke patients. Databases were searched from inception to September 1, 2025. Risk of bias and applicability of the prediction models were assessed using the PROBAST checklist. Meta-analyses were conducted to estimate pooled VTE incidence and the area under the curve (AUC) for model performance using Stata 17.0.ResultsA total of 2,726 records were retrieved, and seven prediction models were included. Reported VTE incidence ranged from 9.8% to 38.9%, with AUC values between 0.781 and 0.978, indicating moderate to high apparent discriminative performance, however, this should be interpreted with caution in light of the high risk of bias and lack of external validation. None of the seven included models underwent independent external validation, and according to PROBAST, all included models were judged to be at high overall risk of bias. The pooled VTE incidence was 20.8% (95% CI: 14.7%–27.0%), and the pooled AUC across six models was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81–0.93).ConclusionAmong the VTE risk prediction models for stroke patients included in this study, although some models demonstrated favorable predictive performance, all models were judged to be at high risk of bias according to PROBAST. Future research should prioritize the validation and refinement of existing models or the development of new models with more rigorous methodological design, in order to better support clinical decision-making for patients with stroke.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024603132, PROSPERO CRD42024603132.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.