Revised Geneva score

The revised Geneva score is a fully objective clinical prediction rule for the pretest probability of pulmonary embolism. Le Gal and colleagues published it so emergency teams could estimate PE likelihood from risk factors, heart rate, and symptoms without the one subjective Wells item that asks whether PE is the most likely diagnosis. Eight additive findings contribute integer points: age greater than sixty-five years, previous deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, surgery or fracture within one month, active malignancy, unilateral lower-limb pain, hemoptysis, heart-rate bands of seventy-five to ninety-four or ninety-five or more beats per minute, and pain on lower-limb deep venous palpation together with unilateral edema. The integer total maps to low, intermediate, or high probability of pulmonary embolism. This capability implements that published rule as a pure function: you send a positive heart rate, an age, and the six yes-or-no findings, and you receive each component together with the summed score and the probability category. A heart rate that is not a positive number is rejected with invalid input rather than being folded into an absolute value.

How the revised Geneva score is defined

The revised Geneva score is a structured pretest-probability rule for pulmonary embolism that uses only objective findings. Le Gal and colleagues published it in 2006 so that emergency clinicians could estimate PE likelihood without the one subjective Wells item that asks whether PE is the most likely diagnosis. Eight criteria are added as integer points.

Age greater than sixty-five years contributes one point. A documented previous deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism contributes three points. Surgery or a lower-limb fracture within the previous month contributes two points.

An active malignant condition contributes two points. Unilateral lower-limb pain contributes three points. Hemoptysis contributes two points.

Heart rate is banded: seventy-five through ninety-four beats per minute contributes three points, and ninety-five or more contributes five points; a rate below seventy-five contributes nothing. Pain on lower-limb deep venous palpation together with unilateral edema contributes four points. The integer total occupies the closed range from zero through twenty-two.

Published three-level cutoffs map zero through three to low probability, four through ten to intermediate probability, and eleven or more to high probability. This capability implements those inclusive thresholds exactly. It does not compute the simplified revised Geneva score in which most items are worth one point, it does not compute the Wells PE score, and it does not replace D-dimer testing, CT pulmonary angiography, or a clinician.

A heart rate that is not a positive finite number cannot represent beats per minute and fails with invalid input rather than being silently inverted. Always frame outputs as educational scores from the published revised Geneva rule, not as a clinical diagnosis or a substitute for professional judgment, imaging, or local treatment protocols.

Where revised Geneva calculators show up in real work

Pulmonary-embolism education, emergency-medicine clerkships, and physician-assistant courses constantly assign revised Geneva drills from textbook vignettes, so a single trusted oracle that returns the integer beside each component speeds grading and demo setup. Simulation centres and electronic worksheet products want a documented age, heart-rate, and risk-factor path that clients can audit by hand rather than a black-box PE risk model that mixes Wells items, PERC criteria, and D-dimer without disclosure.

Research assistants preparing synthetic triage datasets need stable revised Geneva labels from known findings without network calls or model drift, and they need a hard reject when a heart rate arrives as zero or negative so dirty extracts cannot masquerade as scores. If you later need the Wells PE score, the simplified revised Geneva score, PERC, YEARS, or a D-dimer interpretation, treat those as separate search intents and landings rather than overloading this revised Geneva calculator page.

Always present results as educational estimates from the published eight-item rule; clinical decisions require qualified professionals, a suspected-PE context this tool does not collect, and protocols that may combine the score with D-dimer or imaging. Keep requests small, pin the integer score and the probability category in tests, and you get reproducible revised Geneva figures for homework, LMS plugins, and edge workers without standing up a clinical information system of your own.