SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Non-coding RNAs as diagnostic biomarkers for preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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.
- Extracellular Vesicle-Associated Non-Coding RNAs in Preeclampsia: Mechanistic Insights, Biomarker Discovery, and Emerging Nanomedicine Concepts.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Advancements in Liquid Biopsy Technologies for Non-Invasive Detection of Placental Dysfunction and Perinatal Complications: Focus on cfDNA, cfRNA, and Extracellular Vesicles.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026Review
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
backgroundPreeclampsia (PE), a grave obstetric complication, mandates the expeditious formulation of efficacious early diagnostic strategies. Accumulating evidence suggests that non - coding RNAs (ncRNAs), which are present in maternal circulation and placental tissues, display abnormal expression patterns in patients with PE, underscoring their potential as diagnostic biomarkers. This systematic review and meta - analysis intends to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ncRNAs for the detection of PE.
methodsA comprehensive search was carried out across seven databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], Wanfang Database, VIP Database, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) up to December 25, 2024, to identify case - control and cohort studies exploring the diagnostic value of ncRNAs in PE. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies - 2 (QUADAS - 2) tool and the Newcastle - Ottawa Scale (NOS), and publication bias was assessed using Deeks' funnel plot. The pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were computed using Review Manager 5.4 and Meta - DiSc 1.4.
resultsAmong the 2,201 identified studies, 40 fulfilled the inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis. Forty - eight ncRNAs showed diagnostic potential, including 25 microRNAs (miRNAs), 9 long non - coding RNAs (lncRNAs), and 6 circular RNAs (circRNAs). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 80% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 76-84%) and 82% (95% CI: 79-85%), respectively. Single miRNA assays presented superior diagnostic performance (sensitivity [SEN]: 85%, specificity [SPE]: 85%) in comparison to circRNAs (SEN: 80%, SPE: 79%). Notably, combinatorial panels consisting of 2-3 ncRNAs attained optimal diagnostic performance, with a sensitivity of 91% (95% CI: 88-94%), a specificity of 80% (95% CI: 76-84%), and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9418 (standard error [SE] = 0.0152).
conclusionCirculating ncRNAs exhibit significant potential as diagnostic biomarkers for PE, with multi-analyte panels providing improved diagnostic accuracy compared to single-marker strategies.
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.