ArticleBMC urology2021
Three-channel ion chromatograph for improved metabolic evaluation of urolithiasis.
Article in BMC urology, 2021. 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUrolithiasis is a multi-etiological disease resulting from a combination of environmental and genetic factors. One of the most challenging aspects of this disease is its high recurrence rate. For most patients, an in-depth metabolic evaluation may reveal the presence of urinary stones. The fact that different urinary stone-related compounds (USRCs) are measured by different methods renders the metabolic evaluation of urolithiasis quite tedious and complex.
methodsA three-channel ion chromatograph (IC) that automatically measures the concentration of common metabolic indicators of urolithiasis in urine (i.e., oxalate, citrate, uric acid, calcium, and magnesium) was developed to improve the efficiency. To validate its precision and specificity, standard curves were prepared using working solution of these indicators. 100 standard solutions of these indicators were measured with our new IC and three other ICs as the control instruments; analyte concentrations in 100 24-h urine samples from volunteers and 135 calculi patients were also measured.
resultsAll analytes had good linear relationships in concentration ranges of 0-10 mg/L. The precision experiments in the standard and urine samples showed that the measurement errors of the newly developed IC were all less than 5%. In urine, the recovery rate ranged from 99.6 to 100.4%, the coefficient of variation ranged from 1.39 to 2.99%, and the results matched between our newly developed IC and the control ICs. The results of the efficiency test showed that we can finish the analysis at the average number of 14 people per day with the new IC. While the average number in the control group is 3.85/day (p = 0.000).
conclusionsOverall, this multi-channel system significantly improves the efficiency of metabolic evaluation while retaining accuracy and precision.
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.