↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic value of urinary tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2 and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 7 for acute kidney injury: a meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Diagnostic value of urinary tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2 and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 7 for acute kidney injury: a meta-analysis
Published in
Critical Care, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1660-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hui-Miao Jia, Li-Feng Huang, Yue Zheng, Wen-Xiong Li

Abstract

Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2 (TIMP-2) and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 7 (IGFBP7), inducers of G1 cell cycle arrest, are two recently discovered good biomarkers for early diagnosis of acute kidney injury (AKI). To obtain a more robust performance measurement, the present meta-analysis was performed, pooling existing studies. Literature in the MEDLINE (via PubMed), Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was systematically searched from inception to 12 October 2016. Studies that met the set inclusion and exclusion criteria were identified by two independent investigators. The diagnostic value of urinary [TIMP-2] × [IGFBP7] for AKI was evaluated by pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve analyses. The causes of heterogeneity were explored by sensitivity and subgroup analyses. A total of nine published and eligible studies assessing 1886 cases were included in this meta-analysis. Early diagnostic value of urinary [TIMP-2] × [IGFBP7] for AKI was assessed using a random-effects model. Pooled sensitivity and specificity with corresponding 95% CIs were 0.83 (95% CI 0.79-0.87, heterogeneity I (2)  = 68.8%) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.52-0.57, I (2)  = 92.9%), respectively. Pooled positive LR, negative LR, and DOR were 2.37 (95% CI 1.87-2.99, I (2)  = 82.6%), 0.30 (95% CI 0.21-0.41, I (2)  = 43.4%), and 9.92 (95% CI 6.09-16.18, I (2)  = 38.5%), respectively. The AUC estimated by SROC was 0.846 (SE 0.027) with a Q* value of 0.777 (SE 0.026). Sensitivity analysis indicated that one study significantly affected the stability of pooled results. Subgroup analysis showed that population setting and AKI threshold were the key factors causing heterogeneity in pooled sensitivity and specificity. On the basis of recent evidence, urinary [TIMP-2] × [IGFBP7] is an effective predictive factor of AKI. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016051186 . Registered on 10 November 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 24%
Unknown 17 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 20 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 31 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,954,218
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,783
of 6,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,310
of 309,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#55
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.4. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 309,177 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.