SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
CircRNAs as biomarkers for osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
Background: With population ageing, osteoporosis (OP) is increasing worldwide. Circular RNAs (circRNAs) show aberrant expression in OP and may serve as non-invasive biomarkers, but their overall diagnostic performance and sources of heterogeneity remain unclear. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of circRNAs as potential non-invasive biomarkers for OP and to explore sources of heterogeneity. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, and VIP were searched from inception to 25 November 2025. Studies evaluating circRNAs or circRNA panels for osteoporosis (OP) using DXA-derived bone mineral density (BMD) as the reference standard were included. Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS-2. A bivariate random-effects model was used to pool sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratios, and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Subgroup analyses, meta-regression, sensitivity analyses, and Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test were performed. Results: 12 articles comprising 14 independent studies (801 OP patients and 640 non-OP controls) were included. The pooled SEN was 0.87 and SPE was 0.79; PLR and NLR were 4.24 and 0.16, respectively, with a DOR of 26.24 and an AUC of 0.91, indicating good overall discriminatory ability. Spearman correlation (r = -0.169, Conclusion: CircRNAs demonstrate favorable diagnostic accuracy for osteoporosis and may serve as promising non-invasive biomarkers for screening and risk stratification. Current evidence supports their role as adjunctive tools that complement, rather than replace, DXA-derived bone mineral density assessment and traditional clinical risk factor evaluation. However, they should not be considered stand-alone diagnostic tests. Further large-scale prospective studies are required before routine clinical application can be recommended. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251240922.
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.