ReviewArchives of academic emergency medicine2024
Immature Platelet Fraction and Acute Coronary Syndrome; a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Archives of academic emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Glance at Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine Journal in 2024.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Immature Platelet Fraction (IPF) is a measure of the proportion of reticulated platelets (RPs) to all platelets in circulation. IPF may have both prognostic and diagnostic values in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). This study aims to comprehensively summarize the diagnostic utility of IPF levels in patients with ACS, specifically focusing on its ability to differentiate between different subtypes of ACS. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in online databases including MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar up to March 4 Results: Our systematic review contains 15 articles with a total sample size of 2,030 ACS patients. Pooled analysis revealed significant differences in IPF levels of ACS patients compared to healthy controls (MD (95%CI): 2.85 (0.86, 4.85), P-value = 0.004) and stable angina patients (MD (95%CI): 0.58 (0.23, 0.92), P-value < 0.001). Subgroup comparisons within ACS patients demonstrated higher IPF levels in myocardial infarction (MI) vs. unstable angina (UA) (MD (95%CI): 1.81 (0.41, 3.22), P-value = 0.01), ST elevation MI (STEMI) vs. non-ST elevation (NSTEMI) ACS (MD (95%CI): 0.74 (0.31, 1.17), P-value < 0.001), and NSTEMI vs. UA (MD (95% CI): 1.07 (0.24, 1.90), P-value = 0.01). Conclusion: IPF levels could increase in patients with ACS, particularly during the acute phase of STEMI. This suggests that IPF may be a useful biomarker for early diagnosis of ACS. Additionally, IPF levels may help differentiate between ACS subtypes.
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.