Systematic review and network meta-analysis of performance of the Sapporo criteria, the Revised Sapporo criteria, and the 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria for patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: A protocol
6 affiliations
- 1Department of Pediatrics, The Second People’s Hospital of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
- 2Department of Pediatrics, General Hospital of Fushun Mining Bureau of Liaoning Health Industry Group, Fushun, Liaoning, China
- 3College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei, China
- 4Department of Pediatrics, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
- 5Second Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyushu, Fukuoka, Japan
- 6Department of Hematology, Dalian Women and Children’s Medical Group, Dalian, Liaoning, China
Abstract
Background: Antiphospholipid syndrome is an autoimmune disorder characterized by recurrent thrombotic events and/or adverse pregnancy outcomes. Although three classification criteria—the 1999 Sapporo criteria, the Revised Sapporo criteria, and the 2023 ACR/EULAR antiphospholipid syndrome classification—have been developed primarily for research purposes to standardize patient selection, clinicians sometimes apply these criteria to aid in diagnostic decision-making. However, direct head-to-head studies comparing these three criteria remain scarce, and a comprehensive systematic review with network meta-analysis of their classification performance is lacking. Objectives: The primary objective is to conduct a traditional meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio [PLR], negative likelihood ratio [NLR]) of each individual classification criterion. Secondary objectives include: 1) Conducting a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank the three criteria using superiority index (SI); and 2) Exploring sources of heterogeneity through predefined subgroup analyses (primary vs. secondary APS, thrombotic vs. obstetric APS). Methods: Adhering to the PRISMA-P statement, this protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251074199). A comprehensive literature search will be performed in electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science) and gray literature sources (ClinicalTrials.gov, abstracts from international congresses including ACR, EULAR) from their inception to October 2025. Eligible studies are classification performance studies (cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control) that assess at least one of the three criteria against the reference standard (expert clinical diagnosis by rheumatologists/APS specialists, based on comprehensive evaluation of clinical history, persistent antiphospholipid antibodies [aPLs] testing, and exclusion of alternative causes). The quality of included studies will be assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Bayesian NMA will be conducted in R version 4.3.0 with the RStan package, adopting a random-effects ANOVA model. Heterogeneity will be assessed via Cochrane’s Q test and the inconsistency index (I²), while publication bias will be evaluated using Deeks’ funnel plot asymmetry test.
Related
- Performance of machine learning–based prediction models for hypoglycemia in Chinese patients with diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- Estimation of the Label-Noise Transition Matrix with Performance Guarantees via Selective Classification
- A Comparative Evaluation of Missing Data Imputation Techniques and Their Impact on Classification Performance in Healthcare
- The effect of re-warm up and its moderators on performance enhancement and rating of perceived exertion in team-sport athletes: A systematic review and three-level meta-analysis
- Effects of vitamin D supplementation on vitamin D status and physical performance in football players: A systematic review and meta-analysis
BibTeX
@article{wang2026systematic,
title = {{Systematic review and network meta-analysis of performance of the Sapporo criteria, the Revised Sapporo criteria, and the 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria for patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: A protocol}},
author = {Jie Wang and Yangqi Yin and Jiaqi Qu and Zhongbin Tao and Xuyang Chi and Xinyue Zhang},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0359310},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359310},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Systematic review and network meta-analysis of performance of the Sapporo criteria, the Revised Sapporo criteria, and the 2023 ACR/EULAR APS classification criteria for patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: A protocol
AU - Jie Wang
AU - Yangqi Yin
AU - Jiaqi Qu
AU - Zhongbin Tao
AU - Xuyang Chi
AU - Xinyue Zhang
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/09
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0359310
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359310
AB - Background: Antiphospholipid syndrome is an autoimmune disorder characterized by recurrent thrombotic events and/or adverse pregnancy outcomes. Although three classification criteria—the 1999 Sapporo criteria, the Revised Sapporo criteria, and the 2023 ACR/EULAR antiphospholipid syndrome classification—have been developed primarily for research purposes to standardize patient selection, clinicians sometimes apply these criteria to aid in diagnostic decision-making. However, direct head-to-head studies comparing these three criteria remain scarce, and a comprehensive systematic review with network meta-analysis of their classification performance is lacking. Objectives: The primary objective is to conduct a traditional meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio [PLR], negative likelihood ratio [NLR]) of each individual classification criterion. Secondary objectives include: 1) Conducting a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank the three criteria using superiority index (SI); and 2) Exploring sources of heterogeneity through predefined subgroup analyses (primary vs. secondary APS, thrombotic vs. obstetric APS). Methods: Adhering to the PRISMA-P statement, this protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251074199). A comprehensive literature search will be performed in electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science) and gray literature sources (ClinicalTrials.gov, abstracts from international congresses including ACR, EULAR) from their inception to October 2025. Eligible studies are classification performance studies (cross-sectional, cohort, or case-control) that assess at least one of the three criteria against the reference standard (expert clinical diagnosis by rheumatologists/APS specialists, based on comprehensive evaluation of clinical history, persistent antiphospholipid antibodies [aPLs] testing, and exclusion of alternative causes). The quality of included studies will be assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Bayesian NMA will be conducted in R version 4.3.0 with the RStan package, adopting a random-effects ANOVA model. Heterogeneity will be assessed via Cochrane’s Q test and the inconsistency index (I²), while publication bias will be evaluated using Deeks’ funnel plot asymmetry test.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -