Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41846683›Full record

ArticleERJ open research2026

Revisiting Light's criteria: a validated blood-free triple combination matches diagnostic accuracy in over 7000 patients.

José M Porcel, Laura Porcel, Rosa Palma, Silvia Bielsa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ERJ open research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

José M PorcelPleural Medicine and Clinical Ultrasound Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Arnau de Vilanova University Hospital, IRBLleida, Lleida, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2734-8061
Laura PorcelDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario Príncipe de Asturias, Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain.
Rosa PalmaPleural Medicine and Clinical Ultrasound Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Arnau de Vilanova University Hospital, IRBLleida, Lleida, Spain.
Silvia BielsaPleural Medicine and Clinical Ultrasound Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Arnau de Vilanova University Hospital, IRBLleida, Lleida, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Light's criteria remain the standard for distinguishing exudative from transudative pleural effusions, but require serum sampling and lack specificity. We assessed whether a pleural fluid-only approach could match the diagnostic accuracy. Methods: We analysed 7280 diagnostic thoracenteses from a single centre, divided into derivation (n=5000) and validation (n=2280) cohorts. We compared Light's criteria with a triple (protein >3 g·dL Results: The triple combination showed no significant AUC difference Conclusion: A pleural fluid-only triple combination matches Light's criteria in diagnostic accuracy, avoids serum sampling and improves specificity with minimal sensitivity loss in one cohort. This approach may be a practical alternative for the initial classification of pleural effusion when blood sampling is unavailable or undesirable.

Identifiers

PMID41846683
PMCPMC12991015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.