ArticleCureus2025
Procalcitonin-to-Albumin Ratio vs. C-reactive Protein-to-Albumin Ratio in Predicting Sepsis and Its Severity in Children: A Prospective Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in children. The aim of our study was to compare the procalcitonin-to-albumin ratio (PAR) and C-reactive protein(CRP)-to-albumin ratio (CAR) in predicting sepsis and its severity in children and to know which one is better.
methodsThis prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital from July 2022 to January 2024. Procalcitonin, CRP, and albumin, along with baseline investigations, were sent on the day of admission (day 0), day 2 of admission, and day 7 of admission for all the children with suspected sepsis.
resultsThis study included 118 children diagnosed with sepsis who were analyzed. Among them, 83 (70%) were male. The median age was 11 years, with a range of two months to 17 years. The median duration of fever prior to hospitalization was four days. The mortality and morbidity distribution included total septic shock in 22 (19%), multiple organ dysfunction (MODS) in 12 (9%), and death in 13 (11%). In total, 22 (19 %) patients required inotropic support, and 15 (13 %) required respiratory support. The cut-off value for predicting sepsis obtained for PAR was 13.5 with sensitivity 49.47% and specificity 95.61% on the day of admission, whereas the cut-off value for CAR was 0.31 with sensitivity 67.36% and specificity 64.21% on the day of admission. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was done for the diagnostic value of PAR and CAR, and the area under the curve (AUC) for detecting sepsis were 0.73 (95%CI=0.634-0.827) and 0.67 (95% CI=0.544-0.796), respectively.
conclusionThe study demonstrates that the PAR and CAR are valuable diagnostic markers for predicting sepsis in children. On the day of admission, PAR showed a higher specificity (95.61%) compared to CAR (64.21%), making it a reliable marker for ruling in sepsis, while CAR exhibited greater sensitivity (67.36%) for detecting cases. The ROC curve analysis revealed AUC values of 0.73 for PAR and 0.67 for CAR, indicating moderate diagnostic accuracy for both. These findings suggest that PAR and CAR can complement traditional markers in diagnosing pediatric sepsis and its severity, with PAR being particularly useful in identifying more severe cases. Further research is warranted to validate these markers and explore their prognostic utility over time.
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.