Observational studyTurkish journal of medical sciences2024
Prognostic and diagnostic utility of pancreatic stone protein in pediatric sepsis and mortality.
Observational study in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pancreatic Stone Protein as an Emerging Biomarker in Paediatric Nosocomial and Postoperative Sepsis: An Integrative Review of Diagnostic and Prognostic Performance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Sepsis biomarkers: recent advances and future perspectives.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Pancreatic Stone Protein as a Versatile Biomarker: Current Evidence and Clinical Applications.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Pancreatic stone protein inhibits pyroptosis of pancreatic acinar cells in sepsis-associated pancreatic injury.Frontiers in 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: Early detection and prognosis of sepsis in critically ill children is crucial. The aim of this research was to investigate the prognostic ability of pancreatic stone protein (PSP) in validating sepsis and predicting mortality in a prospective observational study. Materials and methods: In a single-center study, pediatric intensive care unit patients were divided into cohorts of confirmed and suspected sepsis, as well as survivors and nonsurvivors. Patients with positive blood culture growth were considered to have confirmed sepsis, while their negative counterparts were considered to have suspected sepsis. Comparisons were made between complete blood counts, laboratory parameters, mortality indices, and C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), and PSP levels. The correlations between PSP and alternative inflammatory markers and mortality indices were then analyzed. The diagnostic and prognostic applicability of PSP for sepsis confirmation and mortality prediction was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: PSP levels were significantly elevated in patients with confirmed sepsis and within the nonsurvivor segment. In confirming sepsis and predicting mortality, PSP outperformed CRP and PCT in terms of sensitivity. It had sensitivity of 95% in diagnosing sepsis at a cut-off level of 50 ng/L, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.52-0.81), and sensitivity of 92% in predicting mortality, with an AUC of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.56-0.83). In addition, PSP showed significant correlations with CRP, PCT, and mortality scores. Conclusion: PSP is emerging as a highly sensitive marker for confirming sepsis and predicting mortality in critically ill pediatric patients. Incorporating the PSP biomarker into routine clinical practice could potentially improve the management of pediatric sepsis.
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.