ReviewEJIFCC2025
The Role of Adiponectin in Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in EJIFCC, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a prevalent microvascular consequence of diabetes with a complex etiology. Adiponectin, an adipokine with anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties, has been implicated in DPN, but its significance remains unclear due to conflicting findings. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the association between circulating adiponectin levels and the risk of DPN in individuals with diabetes. Methods: We did a systematic literature search in PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL for studies investigating adiponectin levels in diabetes patients with and without DPN. A meta-analysis was done to evaluate the pooled mean difference in adiponectin levels between patients and controls. Study quality was rated using the Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tool. Results: The systematic review comprised 13 studies with 3,337 participants. Meta-analysis of 4 studies (920 participants) indicated no significant difference in adiponectin levels between DPN patients (n=418) and controls (n=502) (pooled mean difference 0.01, 95% CI: -0.24 to 0.26, p=0.94), with strong heterogeneity (I Conclusions: Our findings imply that circulating adiponectin levels are not linked with the risk of DPN in diabetes. However, the substantial heterogeneity among studies underscores the need for more well-designed prospective studies to explain the role of adiponectin in DPN etiology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41098219PMC12519698What 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.