Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38506423›Full record

SynthesisImmunity, inflammation and disease2024

Diagnostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio to predict recurrent pregnancy loss and abortion; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sedigheh Hantoushzadeh, Omid Kohandel Gargar, Kyana Jafarabady, Mohammad Moein Rezaei, Fatemeh Asadi, Nasim Eshraghi, Zahra Panahi, Saeedeh Shirdel, Masoumeh Mirzamoradi, Marjan Ghaemi

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Immunity, inflammation and disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Stress, Well-Being, and Reproduction in Wildlife.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sedigheh HantoushzadehVali-E-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Family Health Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Omid Kohandel GargarStudent Research Committee, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran.
Kyana JafarabadyStudent Research Committee, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran.
Mohammad Moein RezaeiStudent Research Committee, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran.
Fatemeh AsadiVali-E-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Family Health Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nasim EshraghiVali-E-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Family Health Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Zahra PanahiVali-E-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Family Health Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Saeedeh ShirdelVali-E-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Family Health Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Masoumeh MirzamoradiClinical Research Development Center, Mahdiyeh Educational Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Marjan GhaemiVali-E-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Family Health Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-2306-7112
Tehran University of Medical Sciences · IRJahrom University of Medical Sciences · IRShahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) in women with a history of abortion (missed and threatened) and recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) in comparison with healthy pregnancies.

methodsElectronic databases including MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for NLR and PLR in women who experienced early pregnancy loss up to January 1, 2023 with a combination of proper keywords. Meta-analysis was done for comparison with three or more studies and summary estimates were measured.

resultsA total of 390 citations were retrieved initially, and after screening, 16 articles were deemed eligible for the final review. Among these, 14 studies underwent meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that the standard mean of the NLR was significantly higher in abortion cases compared to the control group. However, there was no significant difference in the PLR between the pregnancy loss group and the control group.

conclusionNLR was significantly higher among RPL patients compared to the control group, according to these data, NLR may be capable of being used in the diagnosis of RPL as an easy, cheap, and accessible modality. Further studies, which take these variables into account, will need to be undertaken to determine the diagnostic value of NLR and PLR in early pregnancy loss.

Indexed as

Abortion, HabitualBlood PlateletsLymphocytesNeutrophilsAbortion, SpontaneousFemaleHumansLymphocyte CountPlatelet CountPregnancyinflammatory markersmissed abortionrecurrent pregnancy losssystematic reviewthreatened abortion

Identifiers

PMID38506423
PMCPMC10953208
OpenAlexW4393002384

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.