Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36593492›Full record

ArticleBMC nutrition2023

Quantifying the daily intake of water from morning and spot urine samples; retrospective analysis of a clinical trial in volunteers.

Robert G Hahn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Robert G HahnResearch Unit, Södertälje Hospital, Södertälje, Sweden. robert.hahn@ki.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1528-3803
Södertälje Sjukhus · SE

Funding

Mats Kleberg Foundation No number
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe hydration status can be indicated by biomarkers in the urine. However, the sensitivity and specificity of single measurements of biomarkers in morning urine and spot urine samples to quantify previous and current daily water ingestion is unclear.

methodsThe water content of food and liquid consumed by 20 volunteers (mean age 42 years) was calculated daily for two weeks. The volunteers increased their consumption of water by approximately 30% during the second week. They measured their excreted urine volume and sampled the morning urine and 24-h collections of urine for analysis of osmolality and creatinine during the first four days of both weeks (N = 157). The same biomarkers of hydration were measured in spot samples taken at every voiding on the other days (N = 762). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to study the ability of pre-specified ranges of biomarkers to quantify the water intake.

resultsThe biomarkers in the morning urine obtained during normal fluid intake quantified the water consumption with an average area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.72 for osmolality and 0.66 for creatinine. Spot urine yielded an AUC of 0.74 for osmolality and 0.70 for creatinine. The AUCs obtained for days of increased fluid intake were approximately 10% lower. Large intakes (3-4 L daily) were identified with a sensitivity of 50-80% and low intakes (< 1.5-2 L) with a sensitivity of 20-50%, while false positives occurred in approximately 10%.

conclusionBiomarkers in morning urine and spot urine samples distinguished between large and small daily water intakes. Osmolality was slightly superior to creatinine. The indications were less useful during days of increased fluid intake.

Indexed as

Area under the curveBiomarkersCreatinineFluid retentionHydration statusOsmolalityROCUrine analysis

Identifiers

PMID36593492
PMCPMC9809043
OpenAlexW4313430091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.