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.
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.
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.
- Coagulopathy in Critically Ill Patients With Sepsis: Protocol for a Scoping Review.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Early Prediction of Sepsis-Related Coagulopathy: A Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Scoring Systems in the Emergency Department.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.