SynthesisPloS one2023
D-dimer levels in non-COVID-19 ARDS and COVID-19 ARDS patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative Blood Biomarkers of Infectious and Non-Infectious Postoperative Pulmonary Complications: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Association of Albumin-to-D-Dimer Ratio with Mortality in Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of d-dimer as outcome biomarker in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress patients.Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo · 2024Observational
- Complex Thrombo-Inflammatory Responses versus Outcomes of Non-COVID-19 Community-Acquired Pneumonia and COVID-19.Journal of innate immunity · 2024Article
- Advances in Biomarkers for Diagnosis and Treatment of ARDS.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Vitamin D and Zinc Supplementation to Improve Treatment Outcomes among COVID-19 Patients in India: Results from a Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.Current developments in nutrition · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypercoagulability and thrombo-inflammation are the main reasons for death in COVID-19 patients. It is unclear whether there is a difference between D-dimer levels in patients without or with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
methodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrails.gov databases looking for studies reporting D-dimer levels in patients without or with COVID-19 ARDS. Secondary endpoints included length of hospital stay, and mortality data at the longest follow-up available.
resultsWe included 12 retrospective and 3 prospective studies with overall 2,828 patients, of whom 1,404 (49.6%) had non-COVID-19 ARDS and 1,424 had COVID-19 ARDS. D-dimer levels were not significantly higher in non-COVID-19 ARDS than in COVID-19 ARDS patients (mean 7.65 mg/L vs. mean 6.20 mg/L MD 0.88 [CI: -0.61 to 2.38] p = 0.25; I² = 85%) while the length of hospital stay was shorter (non-COVID-19 mean 37.4 days vs. COVID-19 mean 48.5 days, MD -10.92 [CI: -16.71 to -5.14] p < 0.001; I² = 44%). No difference in mortality was observed: non-COVID-19 ARDS 418/1167 (35.8%) vs. COVID-19 ARDS 467/1201 (38.8%).
conclusionsWe found no difference in the mean D-dimer levels between non-COVID-19 ARDS and COVID-19 ARDS patients.
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.