SynthesisImmunity, inflammation and disease2025
The Predictive Significance of Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio for Miscarriage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Immunity, inflammation and disease, 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.
- Blood-based biomarker discovery for early pregnancy loss using integrative multi-omics strategies.EBioMedicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of serum ınflammatory parameters between spontaneous abortion and threatened abortion.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMiscarriage is a common complication of pregnancy, and its underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms remains unclear. The platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), a prothrombotic and inflammatory marker, has been controversially discussed as a potential predictor of miscarriage. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the predictive significance of the PLR in women with miscarriage compared to healthy pregnancies. MATERIAL AND
methodsRelevant studies were systematically searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Sciencey, and Cochrane Library up to December 31, 2023. A systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Articles were identified, screened, and evaluated for quality to determine the predictive value of PLR for miscarriage.
resultsFourteen eligible articles, comprising a total of 3745 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis found comparable PLR levels between miscarriage and non-miscarriage groups (SMD = 0.25; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -0.05 to 0.54). Subgroup analysis revealed significant differences in PLR levels in the missed miscarriage group (SMD = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.01-0.56). and in studies with sample sizes smaller than 200 (SMD = 0.31; 95% CI: 0.05-0.56). Other subgroups did not exhibit significant differences. Subgroup analysis of PLR levels and miscarriage risk demonstrated no significant differences across all subgroups.
conclusionPLR is not a reliable predictor of miscarriage in general. However, for missed miscarriage cases, elevated PLR levels may serve as a practical and cost-effective marker for prediction.
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.