MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Non-coding RNAs as diagnostic biomarkers for preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· other· en· W7084086253 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiagnostic accuracyMeta-analysisDiagnostic odds ratioDiagnostic testConfidence intervalOdds ratiomicroRNASystematic review

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Preeclampsia (PE), a grave obstetric complication, mandates the expeditious formulation of efficacious early diagnostic strategies. Accumulating evidence suggests that non - coding RNAs (ncRNAs), which are present in maternal circulation and placental tissues, display abnormal expression patterns in patients with PE, underscoring their potential as diagnostic biomarkers. This systematic review and meta - analysis intends to assess the diagnostic accuracy of ncRNAs for the detection of PE. Methods A comprehensive search was carried out across seven databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], Wanfang Database, VIP Database, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) up to December 25, 2024, to identify case - control and cohort studies exploring the diagnostic value of ncRNAs in PE. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies − 2 (QUADAS − 2) tool and the Newcastle - Ottawa Scale (NOS), and publication bias was assessed using Deeks’ funnel plot. The pooled sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were computed using Review Manager 5.4 and Meta - DiSc 1.4. Results Among the 2,201 identified studies, 40 fulfilled the inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis. Forty - eight ncRNAs showed diagnostic potential, including 25 microRNAs (miRNAs), 9 long non - coding RNAs (lncRNAs), and 6 circular RNAs (circRNAs). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 80% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 76–84%) and 82% (95% CI: 79–85%), respectively. Single miRNA assays presented superior diagnostic performance (sensitivity [SEN]: 85%, specificity [SPE]: 85%) in comparison to circRNAs (SEN: 80%, SPE: 79%). Notably, combinatorial panels consisting of 2–3 ncRNAs attained optimal diagnostic performance, with a sensitivity of 91% (95% CI: 88–94%), a specificity of 80% (95% CI: 76–84%), and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9418 (standard error [SE] = 0.0152). Conclusion Circulating ncRNAs exhibit significant potential as diagnostic biomarkers for PE, with multi-analyte panels providing improved diagnostic accuracy compared to single-marker strategies.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3530.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence AnalysisFrench-language works237,207