ArticleBMC research notes2015
Reproducibility of a novel computed-tomography based measurement of renal papillary density in the Framingham Heart Study.
Article in BMC research notes, 2015. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRenal papillary calcification is a compelling candidate risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD) and nephrolithiasis. Renal papillary density (RPD), as assessed by computed tomography (CT), is a potential marker for calcification that has not been well studied. We developed a protocol to measure RPD using CT scans and assessed its reproducibility in participants from the Framingham Heart Study.
methodsWe assessed RPD of right kidneys from a single abdominal CT slice in 100 representative participants from the Framingham Heart Study (47% female, mean age 59.9 years) using a novel protocol. We selected the kidney slice with the most open sinus space and assessed RPD using the average of three 20 mm(2) ellipses from upper, middle and lower papillary regions. Two different readers performed RPD measurements and the first reader repeated all measurements to determine both intra- and inter-reader reproducibility, respectively.
resultsOf 100 total individuals included in the replication dataset, six were excluded for poor scan quality. Average RPD across all individuals was 48.7 ± 4.7 (range 38.7-61.7) Hounsfield Units (HU). The intra- and inter-reader correlation coefficients were 0.86 and 0.79, respectively. Bland-Altman analysis suggested no systematic bias between the different reads.
conclusionMeasuring RPD is practical and reproducible using MDCT scans from a small sample of a community-based cohort.
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.