ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Predictive value of the monocyte-to-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio in atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The monocyte-to-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (MHR) has emerged as a novel biomarker for cardiovascular outcomes. However, its role in atrial fibrillation (AF) remains unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of MHR in predicting AF risk. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science up to March 20, 2025. The primary outcome was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of MHR for predicting AF using summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve analysis. The secondary outcome was to explore the relationship between MHR and AF risk. Pooled odds ratio (OR), sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. Results: A total of 13 studies comprising 5,499 participants were included. Elevated MHR was independently associated with an increased AF risk (OR = 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.31; Conclusions: MHR demonstrates moderate diagnostic accuracy for AF risk prediction and is better suited as a screening or complementary biomarker than a standalone diagnostic tool. Its diagnostic performance varies significantly by AF phenotype and clinical context. Given the limited number of studies, significant heterogeneity, and unstandardized MHR cut-offs, large-scale prospective studies with standardized protocols are warranted to validate these findings and facilitate targeted clinical application. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420251030225.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.