ArticlePloS one2026
Blood urea nitrogen to albumin ratio and mortality in critically ill patients with cardiogenic shock.
Article in PloS one, 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
purposeGiven the high mortality associated with cardiogenic shock (CS), this study aimed to evaluate the association between the blood urea nitrogen-to-albumin ratio (BAR) and mortality in critically ill patients with CS. PATIENTS AND
methodsThe data of this retrospective study were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive CARE-IV (MIMIC-IV v2.2) database. Patients who were diagnosed with CS were included as the study population. The primary outcome was one-year mortality, and secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and ICU mortality. Cox regression models were used to estimate the association between BAR and mortality.The prognostic value of BAR was assessed using the time-dependent area under the curve (AUC), net reclassification improvement (NRI), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).
resultsA total of 1,177 patients were enrolled in the study. After adjustment for covariates, BAR was associated with one-year mortality (HR: 1.02 [1.01-1.03], P < 0.001 per 1-unit increase). Compared with the low-BAR group, the medium- and high-BAR groups showed higher risks of one-year mortality (medium group: HR 1.30 [1.02-1.66], P = 0.034; high group: HR 1.75 [1.32-2.33], P < 0.001). Similar associations were observed for in-hospital mortality (per 1-unit increase: HR 1.02 [1.01-1.04], P < 0.001; high vs. low group: HR 1.51 [1.08-2.13], P = 0.017) and ICU mortality (per 1-unit increase: HR 1.02 [1.01-1.04], P < 0.001; high vs. low group: HR 1.67 [1.17-2.40], P = 0.005). E‑value analysis suggested robustness to unmeasured confounding. BAR demonstrated favorable discriminative ability, with a time‑dependent AUC of 0.612 and a Harrell's C‑index of 0.607. When combined with existing prognostic indicators, BAR significantly improved prognostic accuracy.
conclusionIn this study, higher BAR levels were associated with increased mortality in CS patients. BAR provided incremental prognostic value when combined with existing indicators.
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.