Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39821194›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2025

A comparison of disseminated intravascular coagulation scoring systems and their performance to predict mortality in sepsis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Girum Tesfaye Kiya, Gemeda Abebe, Zeleke Mekonnen, Edosa Tadasa, Gedion Milkias, Elsah Tegene Asefa

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Girum Tesfaye KiyaSchool of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0001-7858-3793
Gemeda AbebeSchool of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.
Zeleke MekonnenSchool of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.
Edosa TadasaSchool of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0003-1989-2806
Gedion MilkiasDepartment of Medical Laboratory Science, Arbaminch Health Science College, Arbaminch, Ethiopia.
Elsah Tegene AsefaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0002-2095-0519

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDisseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is a common complication in sepsis patients which exacerbates patient outcomes. The prevalence and outcomes of DIC in sepsis is wide-ranging and highly depends on the severity of the disease and diagnostic approaches utilized. Varied diagnostic criteria of DIC have been developed and their performance in diagnosis and prognosis is not consistent. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the score positivity rate and performance of different DIC scoring systems in predicting mortality in sepsis patients.

methodsFour databases, including Medline (through PubMed), Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies that determined DIC in sepsis patients using the three scoring systems namely: the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis DIC (ISTH-DIC) criteria, the Japanese association for acute medicine DIC (JAAM-DIC) criteria, and the sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC) criteria. A random-effect meta-analysis was performed with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analysis was conducted in view of geographic region and sepsis stages. the protocol was submitted to the Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with an identifier (CRD42023409614).

resultsTwenty-one studies, published between 2009 and 2024, comprising 9319 sepsis patients were included. The pooled proportion of cases diagnosed as positive using ISTH-DIC criteria, JAAM-DIC criteria, and SIC were 28% (95% CI: 24-34%), 55% (95% CI:42-70%), and 57% (95% CI: 52-78%), respectively. The pooled mortality rates were 44% (95% CI:33-53%), 37% (95% CI: 29-46%), and 35% (95% CI: 29-41%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ISTH-DIC to predict mortality were 0.43 (95% CI: 0.34-0.52), and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.74-0.87), respectively, while for JAAM-DIC it was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.57-0.85) and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.28-0.65), respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for SIC were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.57-0.82) and 0.49 (95% CI: 0.31-0.66), respectively.

conclusionThe SIC and JAAM-DIC scores exhibited higher sensitivity to identify patients with coagulopathy and predict patient outcomes, and thus are valuable to identify patients for possible treatment at an early stage. The ISTH-DIC score perhaps identified patients at later stages and demonstrated better specificity to predict disease outcomes. Thus, early identification of patients using the SIC and JAAM-DIC scores and later confirmation using the ISTH-DIC score would be beneficial approach for improved management of patients with sepsis.

Indexed as

Disseminated Intravascular CoagulationSepsisHumansPrognosisSeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID39821194
PMCPMC11737756

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.