Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38711996›Full record

ArticleBioinformation2024

Evaluation of kidney disease using e-GFR compared to measured creatinine clearance.

Sp Tejaswi Pullakanam, Barla Krishna, Nakka Madhuri, Priya K Dhas, Nekkala Ramakrishna

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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

5 authors.

Sp Tejaswi PullakanamDepartment of Biochemistry, Gayatri Vidya Parishad Institute of Health Care and Medical Technology, Marikavalasa, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Barla KrishnaDepartment of Biochemistry, Gayatri Vidya Parishad Institute of Health Care and Medical Technology, Marikavalasa, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Nakka MadhuriDepartment of Biochemistry, Gayatri Vidya Parishad Institute of Health Care and Medical Technology, Marikavalasa, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Priya K DhasDepartment of Biochemistry, Vinayaka Missions Kirupananda Variyar Medical College and Hospitals, Salem, Tamilnadu, India.
Nekkala RamakrishnaDepartment of Biochemistry, Gayatri Vidya Parishad Institute of Health Care and Medical Technology, Marikavalasa, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measurement of renal function is required for diagnosis and stratification of kidney disease. GFR is considered as the best overall measure of kidney function for diagnosis and treatment of patients with CKD. Measuring GFR is time consuming and hence eGFR is calculated using equations with endogenous markers like SCr. Therefore, it is of interest to examine the accuracy of creatinine based estimates (CrCl and CG formula) of GFR among patients. Thus, 60 in-patients (30 men and 30 women) at the GVP hospital and 40 controls were enrolled in the study. SCr and 24 hrs urine creatinine are estimated using blood sample and same day 24-hr urine collection. SCr is estimated using the Kinetic Jaffe's method in Auto analyzer for serum and urine. eGFR is calculated using the CG formula for the SCr value. We evaluated the correlation between measured CrCl derived from 24-hr urine collection and calculated/predicted CrCl using the CG equations. A positive correlation was observed between measured GFR and e-GFR in case and control groups.

Indexed as

chronic kidney disease (CKD)Cockcroft-Gault formula (CG)creatinine clearance (CrCl)glomerular filtration rate (GFR)Serum creatinine (SCr)

Identifiers

PMID38711996
PMCPMC11069609

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.