MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410012021 · doi:10.1186/s12886-025-04075-y

Exploring leukocyte differential count ratio profiles as inflammatory biomarkers in diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4410012021 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Ophthalmology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetic retinopathyMeta-analysisLeukocyte CountsOphthalmologyPathologyDiabetes mellitusImmunologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is increasingly prevalent and a major cause of irreversible blindness, particularly in developing countries. Limited access to ophthalmologists often leads to delayed diagnosis, emphasizing the need for more affordable and widely accessible screening methods to facilitate early identification. Recently, several studies have demonstrated variability in findings regarding the relationship between leukocyte differential count ratio biomarkers and DR. This study aims to investigate the association between leukocyte differential count ratios-NLR (Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio), PLR (Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio), MLR (Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio), and SII (Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index)-and the stages of diabetic retinopathy (DR). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across several databases up to September 2024, with a focus on identifying studies examining the relationship between the leukocyte differential count ratio profiles and diabetic retinopathy. Review Manager was used to conduct the meta-analyses. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used to assess the included studies. RESULTS: A total of 38 studies were included in the systematic review and 27 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The mean differences in the NLR and PLR values were significantly different among the groups and were higher in the PDR group (0.68 (95%CI 0.42-0.95, p < 0.05) and 19.57 (95%CI 10.68-28.46, p < 0.05; respectively). These findings were followed by significant differences in SII value 202.53 (95% CI 196.19-208.86, p < 0.05). Moreover, the MLR values were not significantly different among the groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: NLR, PLR, and SII are associated with both the presence and progression of DR, with increasing levels of NLR and PLR reflecting a higher risk and severity of the disease. However, it is still necessary to justify the need to combine them with other clinical parameters to confirm the diagnosis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it