ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2018
Validation of daily urinary creatinine excretion measurement by muscle-creatinine equivalence.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Metabolism of Creatinine and Its Usefulness to Evaluate Kidney Function and Body Composition in Clinical Practice.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Serum Iodine as a Potential Individual Iodine Status Biomarker: A Cohort Study of Mild Iodine Deficient Pregnant Women in China.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Handgrip Strength Is Positively Associated with 24-hour Urine Creatine Concentration.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Serum iodine concentration and its associations with thyroid function and dietary iodine in pregnant women in the southeast coast of China: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Creatine homeostasis and protein energy wasting in hemodialysis patients.Journal of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Validation of daily urinary creatinine excretion measurement by muscle-creatinine equivalence.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwenty-four-hour urinary creatinine excretion (24hUCrE) is strongly correlated with skeletal muscle mass (SMM). This study suggests how to exploit the power of the SMM-24hUCrE correlation to assess the accuracy of 24hUCrE measurement.
methodsFour hundred and sixty-six men, a subgroup of participants in the 2002-2004 follow-up examination of the Olivetti Heart Study, performed a 24-h urine collection to measure 24hUCrE and underwent bioelectrical impedance analysis to evaluate SMM. Linear regression analysis between 24hUCrE and SMM was used to calculate the muscle-creatinine equivalence and to develop an equation to predict the 24hUCrE depending on SMM. The accuracy of the 24hUCrE measurement was assessed using the change in the SMM-24hUCrE correlation coefficient upon variation in the percentage deviation (%D) between the measured and predicted 24hUCrE.
resultsThe calculated muscle-creatinine equivalence was 1 g of 24hUCrE = 22.73 kg of SMM. The %Ds and the corresponding SMM-24hUCrE correlation coefficients were as follows: %D = 3.0, r = .997; %D = 4.7, r = .989; %D = 8.1, r = .963; %D = 10.5, r = .940; %D = 12.6, r = .909; %D = 18.9, r = .825; %D = 25.8, r = .707; %D = 33.5, r = .595; %D = 41.4, r = .453.
conclusionThe increase in %D corresponds to a reduced correlation between muscle mass and creatinine excretion, which indicated a poor performance in the measurement of the 24hUCrE. For studies on single individuals, where small variations in 24hUCrE could be significant, a %D up to 12.6% is suggested; on the other hand, a wider %D interval could be acceptable for population studies.
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.