ReviewBrain communications2026
Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Brain communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal neurodegenerative disease with limited diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a marker of systemic inflammation, has been proposed as a potential indicator. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses the diagnostic and prognostic value of NLR in ALS. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science through June 2025 for peer-reviewed studies evaluating NLR in adults with ALS diagnosed by established criteria. Eligible studies reported validated measurements of NLR and diagnostic or prognostic outcomes. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed, with heterogeneity, publication bias, evidence certainty and sources of heterogeneity evaluated using meta-regression. Sixteen studies from 12 countries including 357 044 participants met inclusion criteria, comprising 8710 ALS patients (mean age 60.3 years; 59.1% male) and 348 334 controls (mean age 57.8 years; 47.6% male). Meta-analysis of 11 studies showed a pooled mean NLR of 2.74 in ALS patients [95% CI (2.42, 3.10);
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.