ClinicalCalc Pro - Free Medical Calculators for Doctors & Physicians

Clinical References

Evidence-based background, scoring criteria & citations

97

Calculators

15

Specialties

165+

Citations

591+

Clinical Pearls

Pulmonology2 results

Wells PE Score

PulmonologyPhilip S. Wells and colleagues
Open

The Wells Score for Pulmonary Embolism was developed by Dr. Philip Wells and colleagues in 2000 to provide a standardised, reproducible clinical pretest probability assessment for PE, enabling rational use of D-dimer and CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA). Two versions exist: the original "three-tier" (low/moderate/high probability) and the simplified "two-tier" (PE unlikely vs PE likely) version. The score was derived from emergency department cohorts in Canada and subsequently validated in multiple international studies. It is the most widely used PE pretest probability tool, integrated into major diagnostic algorithms (PERC, Christopher, YEARS).

9 criteria6 pearls3 refsValidated

Wells DVT Score

PulmonologyPhilip S. Wells and colleagues
Open

The Wells DVT Score is a validated clinical decision tool developed by Dr. Philip Wells to stratify pretest probability for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in outpatients presenting with leg symptoms. It was designed to guide rational use of D-dimer testing and duplex ultrasound, reducing unnecessary imaging. The score incorporates nine clinical variables related to risk factors, examination findings, and alternative diagnoses. It was derived from prospective ED cohort studies and validated in multiple settings internationally.

10 criteria5 pearls3 refsValidated

The Wells DVT Score is a validated clinical decision tool developed by Dr. Philip Wells to stratify pretest probability for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in outpatients presenting with leg symptoms. It was designed to guide rational use of D-dimer testing and duplex ultrasound, reducing unnecessary imaging. The score incorporates nine clinical variables related to risk factors, examination findings, and alternative diagnoses. It was derived from prospective ED cohort studies and validated in multiple settings internationally.

Validated In

Prospective study of 593 outpatients with suspected DVT; multiple international cohorts

Philip S. Wells and colleagues

1

Active cancer (treatment within 6 months or palliative)

+1 point

2

Paralysis, paresis, or recent lower extremity cast

+1 point

3

Bedridden ≥3 days OR major surgery within 12 weeks

+2 points

4

Localised tenderness along deep venous system

+1 point

5

Entire leg swollen

+1 point

6

Calf swelling >3 cm compared to asymptomatic leg

+1 point

7

Pitting oedema (greater in symptomatic leg)

+1 point

8

Collateral superficial veins (non-varicose)

+1 point

9

Alternative diagnosis at least as likely as DVT

-2 points

10

Score ≤1 = Low probability (~5%), 2-2 = Moderate (~17%), ≥3 = High (~53%)

Low probability (≤1) + negative high-sensitivity D-dimer: safely rules out DVT without imaging (NPV >98%).

High probability (≥3): proceed directly to duplex ultrasound without waiting for D-dimer result.

Age-adjusted D-dimer (age × 10 μg/L for patients >50 years) increases specificity while maintaining sensitivity.

Anticoagulation decision in suspected DVT: start therapeutic anticoagulation in high-probability patients while awaiting imaging if bleeding risk is acceptable.

Isolated distal (calf) DVT: serial ultrasound monitoring at 5-7 days is an alternative to immediate anticoagulation in low-risk patients.

[1]

Wells PS, et al. Value of assessment of pretest probability of deep-vein thrombosis in clinical management. Lancet. 1997;350(9094):1795-1798.

[2]

Wells PS, et al. Does this patient have deep vein thrombosis? JAMA. 2006;295(2):199-207.

[3]

Konstantinides SV, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(4):543-603.

ClinicalCalc Pro References

Evidence-based clinical decision support

All references are for educational and clinical decision support purposes only. Always correlate with clinical context and institutional guidelines.

© 2025 ClinicalCalc Pro™

Talk with Us