IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dbk/health/v3y2024ip.352id.352.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein in Blood as a Diagnostic Method for Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Riofrio Ponce
  • Salazar Garcés

Abstract

Introduction: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) has been proposed as a blood-based diagnostic biomarker for TBI, but its clinical utility remains uncertain. This meta-analysis assessed the diagnostic accuracy of GFAP in identifying TBI. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in biomedical databases for studies published between 2019 and 2024. Clinical trials with adequate sample sizes and standardized GFAP detection methods were included. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were analyzed using statistical models to evaluate diagnostic accuracy. Results: Seven studies with a total of 3,209 patients were included. The overall sensitivity of GFAP was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.83–0.96), demonstrating a high capacity to detect TBI. However, specificity was moderate (0.61, 95% CI: 0.48–0.73), indicating a higher rate of false positives. The summary ROC curve confirmed a good general diagnostic performance but highlighted limitations in differentiating TBI from other neurological conditions. Conclusions: GFAP exhibited high sensitivity as a diagnostic biomarker for TBI, making it a useful tool for early detection. However, its low specificity suggests the need for combination with other biomarkers to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:dbk:health:v:3:y:2024:i::p:.352:id:.352
DOI: 10.56294/hl2024.352
as

Download full text from publisher

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
for a similarly titled item that would be available.

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dbk:health:v:3:y:2024:i::p:.352:id:.352. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Javier Gonzalez-Argote (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hl.ageditor.ar/ .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.