SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2026
C-reactive protein as a predictor of mortality in tuberculosis: 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTuberculosis (TB) remains a leading cause of global mortality, underscoring the need for accessible prognostic tools. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a widely available acute-phase biomarker that may predict outcomes in TB. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the prognostic value of baseline CRP in predicting mortality among adults with TB.
methodsEligible studies included cohort studies, observational studies, and control arms of randomized controlled trials involving adults (≥ 18 years) with microbiologically confirmed TB. The exposure of interest was baseline CRP level, and the primary outcome was mortality, reported as adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) or odds ratios (aORs). Data extraction followed the CHARMS-PF checklist. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS, while certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE.
resultsFrom 1,277 records, nine studies met the inclusion criteria (three retrospective cohorts, three prospective cohorts, and three case-control studies) conducted in Japan, China, South Korea, Chinese Taipei, and South Africa. Five studies reported significant associations between elevated baseline CRP and increased mortality. In pooled analyses, three studies reporting aORs showed a modest but statistically significant association between higher baseline CRP and mortality (aOR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.11; I²=0%). In contrast, pooled aHRs from four studies (aHR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99-1.05; I²=60%) and pooled cHRs from two studies (cHR 1.75, 95% CI 0.58-5.29; I²=91%) were not statistically significant.
conclusionsBaseline CRP showed a modest association with mortality in pooled aOR analyses, but not in pooled hazard ratio analyses. Nevertheless, its low cost and wide availability suggest potential utility as part of multimodal prognostic models, especially in high-risk populations and resource-limited settings. High-quality prospective studies with standardized CRP protocols are needed to clarify its prognostic role. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD420251101984).
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.