Observational studyPloS one2024
Differences in urine creatinine and osmolality between black and white Americans after accounting for age, moisture intake, urine volume, and socioeconomic status.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Water intake mediates cross-sectional associations between urinary kidney injury biomarkers and race in emerging adults.American journal of physiology. Regulatory, integrative and comparative physiology · 2026Article
- Trends in Kidney Stone Prevalence Among United States Adults With Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study From the NHANES Database, 2007-2020.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Article
- Article
- Time of urine sampling may influence the association between urine specific gravity and body composition.PloS one · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urine osmolality is used throughout research to determine hydration levels. Prior studies have found black individuals to have elevated urine creatinine and osmolality, but it remains unclear which factors explain these findings. This cross-sectional, observational study sought to understand the relationship of self-reported race to urine creatinine and urine osmolality after accounting for age, socioeconomic status, and fluid intake. Data from 1,386 participants of the 2009-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were utilized. Age, poverty-to-income ratio (PIR), urine flow rate (UFR), fluid intake, estimated lean body mass (LBM), urine creatinine, and urine osmolality were measured. In a sex-specific manner, black and white participants were matched on age, dietary moisture, UFR, and PIR. Urine creatinine was greater in black men (171 mg/dL) than white men (150 mg/dL) and greater in black women (147 mg/dL) than white women (108 mg/dL) (p < .001). Similarly, urine osmolality was greater in black women than white women (723 vs. 656 mOsm/kg, p = .001), but no difference was observed between white and black men (737 vs. 731 mOsm/kg, p = .417). Estimated LBM was greater in black men (61.8 kg) and women (45.5 kg) than in white men (58.9 kg) and women (42.2 kg) (p≤.001). The strongest correlate of urine osmolality in all race-sex groups was urine creatinine (Spearman ρ = .68-.75). These results affirm that individuals identifying as black produce higher urine creatinine concentrations and, in women, higher urine osmolality after matching for age, fluid intake, and socioeconomic status. The findings suggest caution when comparing urine hydration markers between racial groups.
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.