Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35201303›Full record

ArticleJournal of athletic training2022

Validity of Urine Color Scoring Using Different Light Conditions and Scoring Techniques to Assess Urine Concentration.

Floris Wardenaar, Scott Armistead, Kayla Boeckman, Brooke Butterick, Darya Youssefi, Daniel Thompsett, Kaila Vento

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of athletic training, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Floris WardenaarCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix.
Scott ArmisteadCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix.
Kayla BoeckmanCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix.
Brooke ButterickCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix.
Darya YoussefiCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix.
Daniel ThompsettCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix.
Kaila VentoCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix.
Arizona State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextUrine color (Uc) is used to asses urine concentration when laboratory techniques are not feasible.

objectiveTo compare the accuracy of Uc scoring using 4 light conditions and 2 scoring techniques with a 7-color Uc chart. Additionally, to assess the results' generalizability, a subsample was compared with scores obtained from fresh samples.

designDescriptive laboratory study. SAMPLES: A total of 178 previously frozen urine samples were scored, and 78 samples were compared with their own fresh outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Urine color and accuracy for classifying urine samples were calculated using receiver operating characteristics analysis, allowing us to compare the diagnostic capacity against a 1.020 urine specific gravity cutoff and defining optimal Uc cutoff value.

resultsUrine color was different among light conditions (P < .01), with the highest accuracy (80.3%) of correct classifications of low or high urine concentrations occurring at the brightest light condition. Lower light intensity scored 1.5 to 2 shades darker on the 7-color Uc scale than bright conditions (P < .001), but no further practical differences in accuracy occurred between scoring techniques. Frozen was 0.5 to 1 shade darker than freshly measured Uc (P < .004), but the values were moderately correlated (r = 0.64). A Bland-Altman plot showed that reporting bias mainly affected darker Uc without affecting the diagnostic ability of the method.

conclusionsUrine color scoring, accuracy, and Uc cutoff values were affected by lighting condition but not by scoring technique, with greater accuracy and a 1-shade-lower Uc cutoff value at the brightest light (ie, light-emitting diode flashlight).

Indexed as

DehydrationUrinalysisColorHumansResearch DesignROC CurveUrineassessment of hydration statusfluid intake monitoringhydration educationhydration status

Identifiers

PMID35201303
PMCPMC8876881
OpenAlexW3183497119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.