ArticleBMC nephrology2022
An equation to estimate 24-hour total urine protein excretion rate in patients who underwent urine protein testing.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The association between 24-hour urinary biomarkers and metabolic syndrome: A cross-sectional study in zhejiang, China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe urine protein-creatinine ratio (UPCR) in a spot first-morning urine sample is used to estimate 24-h urine proteinuria (24hUP) in patients who underwent urine protein testing. UPCR cannot be directly compared with 24-h proteinuria. Thus, an equation to estimate 24-h total protein excretion rate, using age, gender, and the UPCR may improve its bias and accuracy in patients who underwent urine protein testing.
methodsWe simultaneously measured 24-h urine protein and the same day's first-morning spot urine from patients with kidney disease. Generalized linear and no-linear models, using age, gender, and UPCR, were constructed to estimate for 24-h urine protein and the best model (NJ equation) was selected to estimated 24 hUP (e24hUP).
resultsA total of 5435 paired samples (including a training cohort of 3803 patients and a validation cohort of 1632 patients) were simultaneously measured for UPCR and 24-h urine protein. In the training cohort, the unadjusted UPCR obviously underestimated 24-h urine protein when UPCR ≤1.2 g/g (median bias - 0.17 g/24 h) and overestimated 24-h urine protein when UPCR > 1.2 g/g (median bias 0.53 g/24 h). In the validation cohort, the NJ equation performed better than the unadjusted UPCR, with lower root mean square error (0.81 vs. 1.02, P < 0.001), less bias (median difference between measured and estimated urine protein, - 0.008 vs. 0.12), improved precision (interquartile range of the differences, 0.34 vs. 0.50), and greater accuracy (percentage of estimated urine protein within 30% of measured urine protein, 53.4% vs. 32.2%). Bland-Altman plot indicated that the agreement of spot and daily estimates was less pronounced with 24 hUP > 2 g than lower values.
conclusionsThe NJ e24hUP equation is more accurate than unadjusted UPCR to estimate 24 hUP in patients with kidney disease and could be used for laboratory application.
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.