Introduction: The need for performing computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) to rule out pulmonary embolism (PE) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (HCP) is determined by a combination of clinical scores and D-dimer values. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of existing and proposed scoring models for detecting PE in HCP, while also examining unique clinical and laboratory features. Furthermore, it involved the evaluation of new clinical and laboratory data, as well as comparison among three established scoring systems (BOVA score, PESI score, and sPESI score) used to predict mortality associated with PE. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 270 hospitalized COVID-19 patients (HCPs) who received CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE). Various scoring systems including Modified Wells, Revised Geneva, Simplified Geneva, YEARS, 4-Level Pulmonary Embolism Clinical Probability Score (4PEPS), and PE rule-out criteria (PERC) were utilized to assess the patients. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AuROC) was determined as part of the analysis. Mortality data for the observed patients was obtained from the Registrar's office. Results: In our analysis of HCPs, the overall prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) was determined to be 28.1%. The PE group exhibited elevated D-dimer levels (10.2 versus 5.3 µg/L, p < 0.001), a higher incidence of preexisting chronic renal failure (16% vs 7%, p = 0.041), and a notably longer duration of COVID-19 symptoms upon hospital admission (10 vs 8 days, p = 0.006). Notably, only the modified Wells score and the 4PEPS score were found to be statistically significant in differentiating between HCPs with and without PE. To enhance predictive accuracy, we introduced a novel (CDD-10) scoring system. This composite score incorporates three key parameters: The scoring system includes C for chronic kidney failure (0.5 points if detected), D for D-dimers (-1.5 points if within normal range, 2 points if above 10.0 µg/L), and D-10 representing the duration of illness prior to hospital admission (2 points for over 10 days or 1 point for more than 8 days). The CDD-10 scoring system spans from -1.5 to 4.5 and exhibited an area under the curve (AuROC) of 0.672 at a threshold of 0.5, surpassing the AuROC values of both the 4PEPS score (0.638) and Modified Wells score (0.611). The probability of pulmonary embolism (PE) was categorized as minimal (0%) for negative CDD-10 scores, medium (24%) for scores between 0 and 2.5, and elevated (43%) for scores above 2.5. During the monitoring period, there were recorded 57 deaths among a total of 270 patients; however, survival rates showed no statistically significant difference between those with PE (82.7%) compared to those without PE (77.1%), with a p-value of P=0.337. Furthermore, we proposed a new risk assessment model named NAP that integrates NT-proBNP levels (>572 pg/mL contributing one point or >982 pg/mL adding two points), Age (>73 years counting one point), and Prothrombin time ratio (>0.89 receiving one point). The NAP model emerged as a superior predictor with an area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.86, surpassing existing BOVA and PESI scores in predictive accuracy. Conclusions: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients (HCPs) requiring CTPA for suspected PE necessitate enhanced risk stratification. Our recently introduced CDD-10 assessment exhibits enhanced precision in forecasting pulmonary embolism in patients admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The NAP scoring system, encompassing three readily available criteria, exhibits heightened precision in forecasting mortality resulting from PE.