A Tragedy within a Tragedy: How the Inappropriate Request for D-dimer during the COVID-19 Pandemic Might Have Harmed So Many People

The COVID-19 pandemic was a global tragedy, resulting in the deaths of millions of individuals. It also exposed serious flaws in medical education, particularly regarding the proper interpretation of scientific evidence and diagnostic tests. In this regard, the unnecessary ordering and misinterpretation of D-dimer stands out, as it has exposed many patients to the risks of unnecessary anticoagulation and may have led to iatrogenic outcomes.

In this article, we review the characteristics of D-dimer as a diagnostic test, integrating with the understanding of physiological and pathological hemostasis and through a mathematical simulation, demonstrate how a considerable number of people might have been harmed by the misinterpretation of the test and yet, paradoxically, it could still appear that anticoagulation was the appropriate course of action, due to cognitive biases that can make an incorrect approach seem correct when interpreted retrospectively.

Authors' Contributions

Y.G.: Conceptualization, writing–original draft, writing–reviewing and editing.

J.N.A.: Writing–original draft, writing–reviewing and editing.

Publication History

Received: 15 August 2025

Accepted: 08 December 2025

Article published online:
22 December 2025

• References

• 1 Crawford F, Andras A, Welch K, Sheares K, Keeling D, Chappell FM. D-dimer test for excluding the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 2016 (08) CD010864
• 2 Akobeng AK. Understanding diagnostic tests 1: Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Acta Paediatr 2007; 96 (03) 338-341
• 3 Hoffman M, Monroe III DM. A cell-based model of hemostasis. Thromb Haemost 2001; 85 (06) 958-965
• 4 Tapon-Bretaudiere J. Hemostasis and thrombosis. Basic principles and clinical practice. Fourth ed. Robert W. Colman, Jack Hirsh, Victor J. Marder, Alexander W. Clowes, and James N. George, eds. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001, 1578 pp., $249.00, hardcover. ISBN 0-7817-1455-9. Clin Chem 2003; 49: 345-346
• 5 Franchini M, Focosi D, Pezzo MP, Mannucci PM. How we manage a high D-dimer. Haematologica 2023 109. . Accessed July 23, 2025 at: https://haematologica.org/article/view/haematol.2023.283966
• 6 Thoppil JJ, Courtney DM, McDonald S. et al. SARS-CoV-2 positivity in ambulatory symptomatic patients is not associated with increased venous or arterial thrombotic events in the subsequent 30 days. J Emerg Med 2022; 62 (06) 716-724
• 7 Weitz JI, Lensing AWA, Prins MH. et al; EINSTEIN CHOICE Investigators. Rivaroxaban or aspirin for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2017; 376 (13) 1211-1222
• 8 Prasad V, Cifu A. A medical burden of proof: Towards a new ethic. Biosocieties 2012; 7 (01) 72-87
• 9 de Alencar Neto JN, Farina E, Nunes Sampaio MC. Schrödinger's cat bias: A new cognitive bias proposed. Cureus 2021; 13 (01) e12697
• 10 Mohammed AS, Boddu P, Mael D, Samee M, Villines D. Inappropriate use of commercial Antinuclear Antibody Testing in a community-based US hospital: A retrospective study. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect 2016; 6 (04) 32031
• 11 Bell KJL, Doust J, Glasziou P. et al. Recognizing the potential for overdiagnosis: Are high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays an example?. Ann Intern Med 2019; 170 (04) 259-261
• 12 Chou R, Croswell JM, Dana T. et al. Screening for prostate cancer: a review of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155 (11) 762-771
• 13 Welch HG, Black WC. Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102 (09) 605-613