ArticleInfection2025
Comparison of the accuracy of hematological parameters in the diagnosis of neonatal sepsis: a network meta-analysis.
Article in Infection, 2025. 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.
- Diagnostic value of platelet-lymphocyte ratio for pediatric sepsis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, there are hundreds of hematological parameters used for rapid diagnosis of neonatal sepsis, but there is no network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic efficacy of these parameters.
methodsWe searched for literature on the diagnostic neonatal sepsis and selected 20 of the most common parameters to compare their diagnostic efficacy. We used Bayesian network meta-analysis, Frequentist network meta-analysis, and individual traditional diagnostic meta-analysis to analyze the data and verify the stability of the results. Based on the above analysis, we ranked the diagnostic efficacy of 20 parameters and searched for the optimal indicator. We also conducted subgroup analysis based on different designs. GRADE was used to evaluate the quality of evidence.
results311 articles were included in the analysis, of which 206 articles were included in the network meta-analysis. Bayesian models fond the top three of the advantage index were P-SEP, SAA, and CD64. In Individual model, P-SEP, SAA, and CD64 had the best sensitivity; ABC, SAA, and P-SEP had the best specificity. Frequentist model showed that CD64, P-SEP, and IL-10 ranked in the top three for sensitivity, while P-SEP, ABC, and I/M in specificity. Overall, P-SEP, SAA, CD64, and PCT have good sensitivity and specificity among all the three methods. The results of subgroup analysis were consistent with the overall analysis. All evidence was mostly of moderate or low quality.
conclusionsP-SEP, SAA, CD64, and PCT have good diagnostic efficacy for neonatal sepsis. However, further studies are required to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39095667What 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.