↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Presepsin as a diagnostic marker for sepsis: evidence from a bivariate meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Presepsin as a diagnostic marker for sepsis: evidence from a bivariate meta-analysis
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2015
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s84811
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaomeng Tong, Yongtong Cao, Min Yu, Chengwu Han

Abstract

The diagnosis of sepsis remains a clinical challenge. Many studies suggest that presepsin plays a role in diagnosing sepsis, but the results remain controversial. This study aimed to identify the overall diagnostic accuracy of presepsin for sepsis through meta-analysis. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE to identify studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of presepsin in sepsis patients. Data were retrieved and the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve and area under curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the overall diagnostic performance. The statistical analysis was performed using Stata 12.0 and Meta-DiSc 1.4 software. Eleven publications with 3,106 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and DOR were 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.88), 0.81 (95% CI 0.74-0.87), 4.43 (95% CI 3.05-6.43), 0.21 (95% CI 0.14-0.30), and 21.56 (95% CI 10.59-43.88), respectively. The area under the curve was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86-0.92). Estimated positive and negative post-probability values for a sepsis prevalence of 20% were 53% and 5%, respectively. No publication bias was identified. Based on currently available evidence, presepsin may have a valuable role in the diagnosis of sepsis, and its results should be interpreted carefully in the context of clinical condition and traditional markers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Hungary 1 3%
Greece 1 3%
Unknown 35 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 13 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 45%
Unspecified 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 14 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2021.
All research outputs
#4,759,600
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#225
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,883
of 277,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#9
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.