SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2026
Risk prediction models for postoperative complications of urosepsis in patients with upper urinary calculi: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUrosepsis is a common postoperative complication in patients with upper urinary calculi, leading to prolonged hospital stays and increased health care costs. Despite the development of several predictive models, no systematic review or meta-analysis has comprehensively evaluated the risk factors for urosepsis in this patient population to date.
methodsA total of seven databases, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and EBSCO, were searched from inception to October 17, 2024. The literature was independently screened, and two researchers extracted profile information. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) checklist was used to assess the risk of bias and applicability. Meta-analyses were conducted using Stata 17.0.
resultsA total of 573 studies were retrieved. Of these, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria for systematic evaluation, and 12 studies were eligible for meta-analysis of predictive models. All studies were found to have a high risk of bias, primarily because of inappropriate data sources and poor reporting in the analysis domain. Meta-analysis of the models combined resulted in an AUC of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87, 0.93), identifying 14 statistically significant independent predictors.
conclusionResearch on risk prediction models for postoperative urosepsis complications remains in the developmental stage, with an overall high risk of bias and a lack of clinical application. Predictors may play a significant role in preventing urosepsis after upper urinary calculi. The development of new models with larger sample sizes, rigorous study designs, and multicentre external validation are crucial for future studies.
trial registrationA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted with the systematic review protocol registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42024596003). CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.