SynthesisChinese medical journal2016
Diagnostic Value of Soluble Suppression of Tumorigenicity-2 for Heart Failure.
Synthesis in Chinese medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Diagnostic Value of Soluble ST2 in Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Role of the IL-33/ST2 axis in cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Beyond Natriuretic Peptides: Corin and Furin As Phenotype-Specific Biomarkers and Therapeutic Gatekeepers in Heart Failure.Current heart failure reports · 2025Review
- Identification of crucial genes related to heart failure based on GEO database.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
- Epitranscriptomics of Ischemic Heart Disease-The IHD-EPITRAN Study Design and Objectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- ANMCO/ELAS/SIBioC Consensus Document: biomarkers in heart failure.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany studies have explored the diagnostic performance of soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 (sST2) for heart failure (HF), but the results are inconsistent. Here, we performed a meta-analysis to assess the role of sST2 in the diagnosis of HF.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database from inception to April 2015. Studies that investigated the diagnostic role of sST2 for HF were reviewed. The numbers of true-positive, false-positive, false-negative, and true-negative results were extracted to calculate pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and the summary receiver operating characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC). The Spearman correlation coefficient was used to check the threshold effect. The Cochran Q statistic (P < 0.05) and the inconsistency index (I2 > 50%) were used to assess the nonthreshold effect. Meta-regression was conducted to explore the source of heterogeneity; subgroup analysis showed the results in different subgroups. Finally, the Deeks' test was performed to assess the publication bias.
resultsNine articles including 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.81-0.86), and pooled specificity was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.72-0.76). The summary DOR was 8.49 (95% CI: 4.54-15.86), and AUC was 0.81 (standard error: 0.03). The Spearman correlation coefficient identified the nonsignificant threshold effect (coefficient = 0.49, P = 0.148), but the nonthreshold effect heterogeneity was significant (Cochran Q = 58.52, P < 0.0001; I2 = 84.6%). Meta-regression found that characteristics of controls might be the suggestive source of nonthreshold effect heterogeneity (P = 0.095). Subgroup analysis found that DOR was 5.65 and 7.86, respectively for the controls of hospital patients and healthy populations. Deeks' test demonstrated that there was no publication bias (P = 0.616).
conclusionThe meta-analysis illustrated that sST2 might play a role in diagnosing HF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.