ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2016
Electronic nutritional intake assessment in patients with urolithiasis: A decision impact analysis.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2016. 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, 1 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
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate a physician's impression of a urinary stone patient's dietary intake and whether it was dependent on the medium through which the nutritional data were obtained. Furthermore, we sought to determine if using an electronic food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) impacted dietary recommendations for these patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsSeventy-six patients attended the Stone Clinic over a period of 6 weeks. Seventy-five gave consent for enrollment in our study. Patients completed an office-based interview with a fellowship-trained endourologist, and a FFQ administered on an iPad. The FFQ assessed intake of various dietary components related to stone development, such as oxalate and calcium. The urologists were blinded to the identity of patients' FFQ results. Based on the office-based interview and the FFQ results, the urologists provided separate assessments of the impact of nutrition and hydration on the patient's stone disease (nutrition impact score and hydration impact score, respectively) and treatment recommendations. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to compare pre-FFQ data to post-FFQ data.
resultsHigher FFQ scores for sodium (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; p=0.02) and fluids (OR, 1.03, p=0.04) were associated with a higher nutritional impact score. None of the FFQ parameters impacted hydration impact score. A higher FFQ score for oxalate (OR, 1.07; p=0.02) was associated with the addition of at least one treatment recommendation.
conclusionsInformation derived from a FFQ can yield a significant impact on a physician's assessment of stone risks and decision for management of stone disease.
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.