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).
Details Formula Study characteristics Files & References
Model author
Model ID
Revision date
MeSH terms
No MeSH classifications added
Model type
Linear model (Calculation)
No rating criteria met
No Formula defined yet
Condition Formula

Additional information

No additional information available

Study Population

Total population size: 0

Additional characteristics

No additional characteristics defined
Wells’ Criteria for Pulmonary Embolism
Refer to Intended Use for instructions before use
Evidencio B.V., Irenesingel 19, 7481 GJ, Haaksbergen, the Netherlands

Related files

No related files available

Supporting Publications

No supporting publications available
Notes are only visible in the result download and will not be saved by Evidencio

Wells' score for pulmonary embolism:

{{ resultSubheader }}
{{ chart.title }}

Outcome stratification

Result interval {{ additionalResult.min }} to {{ additionalResult.max }}

Conditional information

Result interpretation

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 }}

Calculations alone should never dictate patient care, and are no substitute for professional judgement. See our full disclaimer.

Please enter a comment of rating
Comments are visible to anyone

Model feedback

No feedback yet 1 Comment {{ model.comments.length }} Comments
Not rated | On {{ comment.created_at }} {{ comment.user.username }} a no longer registered author wrote:

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:


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

Evidencio Community Account Benefits

With an Evidencio Community account you can:

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

Disclaimer: Calculations alone should never dictate patient care, and are no substitute for professional judgement.