ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2013
Assessment and modeling of routinely used biochemical laboratory data of healthy individuals and end-stage renal failure (ESRF) patients by three different chemometric methods.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2013. 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
backgroundIn recent years, the use of biochemical markers has received increasing attention for purposes of risk assessment and clinical management in renal failure patients. Chemometric methods are often used in medical studies and there are already indications for their specific role as a tool of the medical statistics.
methodsThree chemometric methods, discriminant analysis (DA), binary logistic regression analysis (BLRA), and cluster analysis (CA), were used for assessment and modeling of routinely used biochemical laboratory data of 18 parameters that were determined from 185 healthy individuals (HIs) and 173 end-stage renal failure (ESRF) patients.
resultsThe above-mentioned chemometric methods were performed using the data set of 14 parameters since the rest 4 parameters did not present significant difference between healthy and patients. DA created a model using only ALB (Albumin), K (Potassium), TG (Triglyceride), and ALP (Alkaline phosphatase); BLRA model also used the above four parameters; CA classified all the cases into two clusters using the same four parameters and one more parameter, AST (aspartate aminotransferase).
conclusionsThis study provides models for assessment and modeling of routinely used biochemical laboratory data, finding groups of similarity among clinical tests usually determined on HIs and ESRF patients, contributing in data mining and reducing costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.