SynthesisIntensive care medicine2026
STARDaki: a consensus-based STARD extension for standardized reporting of diagnostic accuracy in acute kidney injury.
Synthesis in Intensive care medicine, 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBiomarkers have been identified to predict, diagnose and prognosticate acute kidney injury (AKI) but existing studies are heterogenous and contradictory.
objectiveTo compare diagnostic performance of AKI biomarkers, evaluate the quality of AKI biomarker studies and to develop standards for reporting studies of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of AKI biomarkers.
methodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies focusing on the diagnostic performance of AKI biomarkers published before February 2025. Retrieved DTA studies were assessed for methodological quality and completeness using the QUADAS-2 and Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) 2015 checklists. An international 17 member expert panel was convened to agree consensus standards for AKI biomarker studies (STARDaki) via a modified Delphi process.
results122 DTA studies for AKI biomarkers were identified, but 15 were insufficiently reported. Of the remaining 107 studies, only 19 reported on diagnosis of AKI within 48 h of sampling. Of these studies, only 16 were considered high-quality based on the QUADAS-2 criteria. The compliance level with the STARD checklist was too low to permit meta-analysis. The expert panel agreed criteria for patient selection, reference standards, and reporting of test-retest reliability to supplement the STARD guidance for AKI biomarker studies.
conclusionMost studies examining AKI biomarker performance fail to conform to the STARD standards for reporting, leading to poor diagnostic accuracy estimates and reduced clinical applicability and generalizability. An expert panel proposed STARDaki criteria to advance the development and clinical use of AKI biomarkers ( www.stardaki.icu ).
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.