Observational studyPloS one2018
How to measure and monitor albuminuria in healthy toddlers?
Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Kidney injury rates after unilateral nephrectomy in childhood-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2022Pooled it
- Associations among environmental exposure to trace elements and biomarkers of early kidney damage in the pediatric population.Biometals : an international journal on the role of metal ions in biology, biochemistry, and medicine · 2024Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Vedolizumab in Kidney Transplant Recipients With Crohn's Disease.Kidney international reports · 2023Article
- Clinical Management of Children with a Congenital Solitary Functioning Kidney: Overview and Recommendations.European urology open science · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveUrinary albumin:creatinine ratio (UACR) in first morning void (FMV) urine samples collected over three days is the recommended method for measuring and monitoring albuminuria in adults in the clinical setting. Such a guideline is not available for toddlers and young children. We tested several urine collection strategies for albuminuria measurement in toddlers in a prospective observational study. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Both a FMV and a random daytime urine sample were collected on three consecutive days at week 0, 4, and 8 in toddlers aged 12-48 months. Intra-individual coefficients of variation (CV) of urinary albumin (UAC) and UACR were compared using only the first measurement and using all three measurements per time point. In addition, these were compared with published CV of adults.
resultsA total of 80 toddlers (mean age 26.6 months, 53% male) were included. Intra-individual CV of FMV samples appeared lower than with random samples. The intra-individual CV in UAC or UACR was smaller using multiple compared to single samples. The lowest intra-individual CV was observed when UAC was measured in FMV over three consecutive days (38.3%). CV of UAC was similar to values published for adults. However, UACR CV was considerably higher in toddlers.
conclusionsThese data show that-in analogy with adult data-multiple first morning void urine samples should be preferred to single or random urine samples for establishing and monitoring albuminuria in toddlers. Further studies are needed to investigate why creatinine correction for differences in urine dilution is less effective in children.
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.