SynthesisScientific reports2026
To explore the performance of ultrasound elastography in staging diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess the diagnostic performance of different quantitative ultrasound elastography (USE) parameters in differentiating five stages of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) from each other as well as from healthy participants and type 2 diabetic patients without nephropathy. The protocol was pre-registered at https://osf.io/dfu8b/ . Using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library, we found studies up to October 10, 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2). The USE parameter of cortical stiffness was compared in an inter-stage manner based on mean differences, standardized mean differences, and ratios of means. In addition, cortical stiffness was evaluated for its diagnostic accuracy in staging DKD. Sensitivity and publication bias analyses were also conducted. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Eighteen studies were included with 2814 participants. The mean stiffness value consistently increased with the progression of the disease. Differentiation of five stages of DKD from two non-DKD groups, respectively, showed sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under curve of 79%, 83%, 4.70, 0.25, 18.68, and 0.88. These values for differentiation of stages 3 to 5 of DKD from the other four milder groups were 80%, 79%, 3.85, 0.25, 15.53, and 0.87, respectively. USE shows promise as a noninvasive, simple, and quantitative diagnostic tool for staging DKD, especially in its early stages. With standardized protocols, its application could benefit patient management by enhancing the accuracy of DKD staging.
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.