ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2019
Proteinuria impacts patient survival differentially based on clinical setting: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of cohorts from a single health system: Retrospective cohort study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2019. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic kidney disease (CKD) staging is improved by adding proteinuria to glomerular filtration rate (GFR). While proteinuria independently predicts CKD progression and mortality, the clinical setting of proteinuria determination has not been well-studied previously. The objective of our study is to determine whether clinical setting differentially impacts survival outcomes.
methodsKaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses of overall survival were performed retrospectively for cohorts of outpatients (n = 22,918), emergency patients (n = 16,861), and inpatients (n = 12,304) subjected to urinalysis (UA) at a single health system in 2010. GFR (G1-G5) and proteinuria (A1:<30 mg, A2:30-300 mg, A3:>300 mg) were classified under Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guidelines.
resultsGFR and proteinuria levels varied more in inpatients than in emergency and outpatients. For each clinical population, survival significantly decreased with increasing proteinuria (A1>A2>A3, p < 0.05 for each comparison). The effect of proteinuria on survival differed by clinical setting, with statistical differences in all categories other than A3 in outpatients and emergency patients (p = 0.98). The strongest predictors of mortality were cancer diagnosis (HR: 3.07, p < 0.0001) and very-high KDIGO classification (HR: 2.01, p < 0.0001). Limitations include the retrospective observational study design and single health system analysis.
conclusionsThe value of UA to screen for proteinuria in each clinical setting is evident, but the impact of A2 and A3 level proteinuria on survival varies depending on the clinical scenario in which the determination was made. The clinical setting of proteinuria measurement should be factored into both patient care and clinical research activities.
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.