No abstract

DR, Rodger M et al. Derivation of a simple clinical model to categorize patients' probability of pulmonary embolism: Increasing the model's utility with the SimpliRED D-dimer. Thromb Haemost 2000;83:416-420. 6. Fedullo PF, Tapson VF. The evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2003;349:1247-1256. 7. Perrier A, Roy PM, Aujesky D et al. Diagnosing pulmonary embolism in outpatients with clinical assessment, D-dimer measurement, venous ultrasound, and helical computed tomography: A multicenter management study. Am J Med 2004;116:292-299. 8. Laack TA, Goyal DG. Pulmonary embolism: An unsuspected killer. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2004;22:961-983. 9. Smith DC. Pulmonary embolism presenting as an acute surgical abdomen. J Emerg Med 1996;14:715-717. 10. Unluer EE, Denizbasi A. A pulmonary embolism case presenting with upper abdominal and flank pain. Eur J Emerg Med 2003;10:135-138. *Total scores range from 0 to 60 (higher number signifies more depressive symptoms); scores ! 16 indicate major depression. w Better and worse eye are defined according to visual acuity. z Contrast sensitivity normal range for age 60 to 75: 1.72 AE 0.08 at 1 meter. § Composite scores range from 0 to 28, with lower scores indicating higher functioning; scores 49 indicate cognitive impairment. kAdjusted for demographic characteristics, number of medical conditions, and CES-D score. SD 5 standard deviation.