ReviewFrontiers in medicine2023
The accuracy of soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor for the diagnosis of neonatal sepsis: a meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cord blood procalcitonin and soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor in predicting histological chorioamnionitis - A pilot study.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2026Article
- Urokinase-Type Plasminogen Activator Receptor (uPAR) in Inflammation and Disease: A Unique Inflammatory Pathway Activator.Biomedicines · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Neonatal sepsis is one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality in newborns. However, atypical clinical manifestations and symptoms make the early diagnosis of neonatal sepsis a challenge. Relatively high-serum soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) has been implicated as a diagnostic biomarker for adult sepsis. Therefore, the meta-analysis is intended to explore the diagnostic value of suPAR for neonatal sepsis. Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biological Medicine Disk, and Wanfang databases were retrieved from inception to 31 December 2022 to collect diagnostic accuracy studies about suPAR for neonatal sepsis. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Then, a meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0 software. Results: A total of six articles involving eight studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.89 [95%CI (0.83-0.93)], 0.94 [95%CI (0.77-0.98)], 14 [95%CI (3.5-55.2)], 0.12 [95%CI (0.08-0.18)], and 117 [95%CI (24-567)], respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curves was 0.92 [95%CI (0.90-0.94)]. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of the results, and publication bias was not observed. Fagan's nomogram results demonstrated the clinical availability of the findings. Conclusion: Current evidence suggests that suPAR has potential diagnostic value for neonatal sepsis. Owing to the limited quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
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.