Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36016121›Full record

ReviewVaccines2022

The Role of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Risk Stratification and Prognostication of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Ashwaghosha Parthasarathi, Sunag Padukudru, Sumalata Arunachal, Chetak Kadabasal Basavaraj, Mamidipudi Thirumala Krishna, Koustav Ganguly, Swapna Upadhyay, Mahesh Padukudru Anand

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Vaccines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ashwaghosha ParthasarathiAllergy, Asthma, and Chest Centre, Krishnamurthypuram, Mysore 570004, India.ORCID 0000-0002-7270-0247
Sunag PadukudruYenepoya Medical College, Yenepoya University, Mangalore 575018, India.ORCID 0000-0003-4088-9548
Sumalata ArunachalDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, JSS Medical College, JSSAHER, Mysore 570015, India.
Chetak Kadabasal BasavarajDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, JSS Medical College, JSSAHER, Mysore 570015, India.
Mamidipudi Thirumala KrishnaUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Institute of Immunology Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2GW, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2109-5777
Koustav GangulyUnit of Integrative Toxicology, Institute of Environmental Medicine (IMM), Karolinska Institutet, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-8531-8154
Swapna UpadhyayUnit of Integrative Toxicology, Institute of Environmental Medicine (IMM), Karolinska Institutet, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden.
Mahesh Padukudru AnandDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, JSS Medical College, JSSAHER, Mysore 570015, India.

Funding

Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation The study is supported by Swedish Heart Lung Foundation (SU: 20210548; KG: 20200776).Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust PAM was supported by the Wellcome Trust, Grant No. IA/TS- G/19/1/600026.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies have proposed that the neutrophil−lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is one of the various biomarkers that can be useful in assessing COVID-19 disease-related outcomes. Our systematic review analyzes the relationship between on-admission NLR values and COVID-19 severity and mortality. Six different severity criteria were used. A search of the literature in various databases was conducted from 1 January 2020 to 1 May 2021. We calculated the pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) for the collected NLR values. A meta-regression analysis was performed, looking at the length of hospitalization and other probable confounders, such as age, gender, and comorbidities. A total of sixty-four studies were considered, which included a total of 15,683 patients. The meta-analysis showed an SMD of 3.12 (95% CI: 2.64−3.59) in NLR values between severe and non-severe patients. A difference of 3.93 (95% CI: 2.35−5.50) was found between survivors and non-survivors of the disease. Upon summary receiver operating characteristics analysis, NLR showed 80.2% (95% CI: 74.0−85.2%) sensitivity and 75.8% (95% CI: 71.3−79.9%) specificity for the prediction of severity and 78.8% (95% CI: 73.5−83.2%) sensitivity and 73.0% (95% CI: 68.4−77.1%) specificity for mortality, and was not influenced by age, gender, or co-morbid conditions. Conclusion: On admission, NLR predicts both severity and mortality in COVID-19 patients, and an NLR > 6.5 is associated with significantly greater the odds of mortality.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 mortalityCOVID-19 outcomesCOVID-19 severityneutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratioNLRsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36016121
PMCPMC9415708

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.