SynthesisJournal of neurology2024
Systematic review and evidence gap mapping of biomarkers associated with neurological manifestations in patients with COVID-19.
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Overview of Systematic Reviews on Treatments for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Assessing Methodological Quality and Mapping Evidence Gaps.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2025Pooled it
- eHealth tools to assess the neurological function for research, in absence of the neurologist: a systematic review, part II (hardware).Journal of neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Persistent impairments in muscle function and symptom burden in post-COVID syndrome: a prospective longitudinal study.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Observational
- Serum NfL and GFAP in post-COVID syndrome: minimal evidence of CNS injury after adjusting for confounders.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2026Article
- Elucidating SARS-CoV-2 neurotropism: a comprehensive Mendelian randomization study on cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and their relevance to COVID-19 neurological manifestations.Virology journal · 2025Article
- Cerebrospinal fluid profile in coronavirus disease 2019, a prospective case series study.International journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- A Delphi consensus to identify the key screening tests/questions for a digital neurological examination for epidemiological research.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to synthesize the existing evidence on biomarkers related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients who presented neurological events.
methodsA systematic review of observational studies (any design) following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and the Cochrane Collaboration recommendations was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42021266995). Searches were conducted in PubMed and Scopus (updated April 2023). The methodological quality of nonrandomized studies was assessed using the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale (NOS). An evidence gap map was built considering the reported biomarkers and NOS results.
resultsNine specific markers of glial activation and neuronal injury were mapped from 35 studies published between 2020 and 2023. A total of 2,237 adult patients were evaluated in the included studies, especially during the acute phase of COVID-19. Neurofilament light chain (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) biomarkers were the most frequently assessed (n = 27 studies, 77%, and n = 14 studies, 40%, respectively). Although these biomarkers were found to be correlated with disease severity and worse outcomes in the acute phase in several studies (p < 0.05), they were not necessarily associated with neurological events. Overall, 12 studies (34%) were judged as having low methodological quality, 9 (26%) had moderate quality, and 9 (26%) had high quality.
conclusionsDifferent neurological biomarkers in neurosymptomatic COVID-19 patients were identified in observational studies. Although the evidence is still scarce and conflicting for some biomarkers, well-designed longitudinal studies should further explore the pathophysiological role of NfL, GFAP, and tau protein and their potential use for COVID-19 diagnosis and management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38015300What 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.