Wells’ Criteria for Pulmonary Embolism - Evidencio
Wells’ Criteria for Pulmonary Embolism
Objectifies risk of pulmonary embolism. The Wells’ Criteria risk stratifies patients for pulmonary embolism (PE) and provides an estimated pre-test probability. The physician can then chose what further testing is required for diagnosing pulmonary embolism (I.E. d-dimer or CT angiogram).
Research authors: None
Version: 1.4
  • Public
  • Pulmonology
  • {{ modelType }}
  • Details
  • Validate algorithm
  • Save input
  • Load input
Display
Units

{{section.title}}

Calculate the result

Set more parameters to perform the calculation

Wells' score for pulmonary embolism:

{{ resultSubheader }}
{{ chart.title }}
Result interval {{ additionalResult.min }} to {{ additionalResult.max }}

Conditional information

The Wells’ Criteria risk stratifies patients for pulmonary embolism (PE), and has been validated in both inpatient and emergency department settings. Its score is often used in conjunction with d-dimer testing to evaluate for PE. There must first be a clinical suspicion for PE in the patient (this should not be applied to all patients with chest pain or shortness of breath, for example). Wells' can be used with either 3 tiers (low, moderate, high) or 2 tiers (unlikely, likely). We recommend the two tier model as this is supported by ACEP’s 2011 clinical policy on PE. Wells’ is often criticized for having a “subjective” criterion in it (“PE #1 diagnosis or equally likely”) Wells’ is not meant to diagnose PE but to guide workup by predicting pre-test probability of PE and appropriate testing to rule out the diagnosis.

{{ file.classification }}
PRO
Note
Notes are only visible in the result download and will not be saved by Evidencio

This algorithm is provided for educational, training and information purposes. It must not be used to support medical decision making, or to provide medical or diagnostic services. Read our full disclaimer.

Underlying algorithms Part of
Comments
Comment
Please enter a comment
Comments are visible to anyone

Algorithm feedback

No feedback yet 1 Comment {{ model.comments.length }} Comments
On {{ comment.created_at }} {{ comment.user.username }} a no longer registered author wrote:
{{ comment.content }}
logo

Please sign in to enable Evidencio print features

In order to use the Evidencio print features, you need to be logged in.
If you don't have an Evidencio Community Account you can create your free personal account at:

https://www.evidencio.com/registration

Printed results - Examples {{ new Date().toLocaleString() }}

Evidencio Community Account Benefits

With an Evidencio Community account you can:

  • Create and publish your own prediction algorithms.
  • Share your prediction algorithms with your colleagues, research group, organization or the world.
  • Review and provide feedback on algorithms that have been shared with you.
  • Validate your algorithms and validate algorithms from other users.
  • Find algorithms based on Title, Keyword, Author, Institute, or MeSH classification.
  • Use and save prediction algorithms and their data.
  • Use patient specific protocols and guidelines based on sequential algorithms and decision trees.
  • Stay up-to-date with new algorithms in your field as they are published.
  • Create your own lists of favorite algorithms and topics.

A personal Evidencio account is free, with no strings attached!
Join us and help create clarity, transparency, and efficiency in the creation, validation, and use of medical prediction algorithms.

Disclaimer: Calculations alone should never dictate patient care, and are no substitute for professional judgement.
Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact | Refuse cookies |
Evidencio v3.35 © 2015 - 2025 Evidencio. All Rights Reserved