Skip to main content
. 2016 Mar 5;129(5):570–577. doi: 10.4103/0366-6999.177000

Table 3.

Results of subgroup analysis

Items Number of studies (n) Heterogeneity DOR with 95% CI


χ2 P I2 (%) DOR LL UL
Language
 English 5 12.39 0.015 67.7 4.59 2.43 8.64
 Chinese 5 29.74 <0.001 86.5 15.93 6.31 40.19
Endpoint
 HF 7 45.87 <0.001 86.9 11.43 5.22 25.01
 HFNEF 2 4.52 0.034 77.9 4.11 1.13 14.97
 HFREF 1 4.65 2.01 10.75
Assay methods
 MBL ST2 assay 3 21.95 <0.001 90.9 7.74 1.90 31.48
 Presage ST2 assay 4 14.97 0.002 80.0 6.35 2.78 14.54
 R&D ST2 assay 1 8.06 3.28 19.78
 Other ELISA kits 2 21.82 <0.001 95.4 28.12 0.62 1272.00
Study quality
 Rated “Low” <6 items 6 41.26 <0.001 87.9 11.84 4.63 30.27
 Rated “Low” ≥6 items 4 8.89 0.031 66.3 5.36 2.81 10.25
Characteristic of controls
 Hospital patients 5 9.50 0.050 57.9 5.65 3.34 9.56
 Healthy populations 4 24.99 <0.001 88.0 7.86 2.80 22.05
 Unclear 1 206.61 46.24 923.16

HF: Heart failure; HFNEF: Heart failure with a normal ejection fraction; HFREF: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; MBL: Medical and Biological Laboratories; ELISA: Enzyme-linked immune sorbent assay; DOR: Diagnostic odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval; LL: Lower limit; UL: Upper limit.