ArticleIndian journal of pediatrics2026
Evaluation of Systemic Inflammation in Pediatric Rheumatic Diseases Using a Composite Systemic Inflammation Score.
Article in Indian journal of pediatrics, 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
objectivesIsolated inflammatory markers have been proposed to assess systemic inflammation, but a comprehensive composite measure is still needed. The current study aimed to evaluate systemic inflammation in Pediatric Rheumatic Diseases by developing a biomarker-based composite systemic inflammation score (CSIS).
methodsThis prospective observational study enrolled 117 children with rheumatic diseases-systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SOJIA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), IgA vasculitis (IgAV), and Kawasaki disease (KD), along with 50 age, gender and temporal matched healthy controls. Associations between disease groups and inflammatory biomarkers [neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet count, ESR, CRP, D-dimer, procalcitonin, ferritin, fibrinogen, and albumin] were evaluated. The CSIS was developed using eight validated, routinely available parameters, with a total score ranging from 0 to 16. Prediction accuracy was evaluated with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
resultsComparative analysis demonstrated significantly higher levels of inflammatory markers in patients than in controls, including NLR, platelet count, erythrocyte ESR, CRP, D-dimer, ferritin, fibrinogen, and albumin (all p <0.001). These eight significantly associated biomarkers were incorporated into the scoring systems' development. The CSIS was stratified into four categories to reflect the degree of inflammatory burden: 0-2 (no inflammation), >2-7 (mild inflammation), >7-10 (moderate inflammation), and >10 (severe inflammation).
conclusionsThe CSIS can be readily applied to gauge inflammation severity in the clinical setting. Changes in inflammation scores over time can also reflect disease progression or remission, allowing for timely interventions and better outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42745132What 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.