ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2024
Comparison of the applicability of seven calculation equations of glomerular filtration rate among elderly people in China.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2024. 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAt present, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) remains the most frequently utilized parameter in the evaluation of kidney injury severity. Numerous equations have been formulated based on serum creatinine (Scr) or serum cystatin C (Cysc) levels. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the efficacy of these equations in assessing eGFR, particularly for elderly individuals in China. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the MDRD, MDRDc, CKD-EPI series, BIS1, and FAS equations within the Chinese elderly population.
methodsA cohort of 298 elderly patients with measured GFR (mGFR) was enrolled. The patients were categorized into three subgroups based on their mGFR levels. The eGFR performance was examined, taking into account bias, interquartile range (IQR), accuracy P30, and root-mean-square error (RMSE). Bland-Altman plots were employed to verify the validity of eGFR.
resultsThe participants had a median age of 71 years, with 167 (56.0%) being male. Overall, no significant differences in bias were observed among the seven equations (P > 0.05). In terms of IQR, P30, and RMSE, the BIS1 equation demonstrated superior accuracy (14.61, 72.1%, and 13.53, respectively). When mGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m
conclusionsThis study suggested that the BIS1 equation stands out as the most applicable for estimating GFR in Chinese elderly patients with normal renal function or only moderate decline. 2020NL-085-03, 2020.08.10, retrospectively registered.
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.