Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39836424›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Use of Albumin-Adjusted Calcium Measurements in Clinical Practice.

Noémie Desgagnés, James A King, Gregory A Kline, Isolde Seiden-Long, Alexander A Leung

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Noémie DesgagnésDepartment of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
James A KingData and Research Services, Alberta Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Provincial Research Data Services, Alberta Health Services.
Gregory A KlineDivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Isolde Seiden-LongAlberta Precision Laboratories and Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta Canada.
Alexander A LeungDivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Using albumin-adjusted calcium is commonly recommended for for measuring calcium, but with little empirical evidence to support the practice. Objective: To assess the correlation between total calcium measurements (with or without adjustment) vs the ionized calcium level as a reference standard. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a population-based cross-sectional study in the province of Alberta, Canada, including adults tested for serum total calcium and ionized calcium simultaneously between January 1, 2013, and October 31, 2019. Statistical analysis was performed from March 2023 to October 2024. Main Measures and Outcomes: The correlation between unadjusted and adjusted total calcium measurements (using 10 formulas) and the ionized calcium level was evaluated, along with the potential association with the classification of calcium status. Results: Among 22 658 patients included, 11 889 (52.5%) were female and 10 769 (47.5%) were male; the median (IQR) age was 60 (47-72) years. The unadjusted total calcium (R2 = 71.7%; 95% CI, 71.1%-72.2%) had a stronger correlation with ionized calcium than the commonly used simplified Payne formula (ie, total calcium [mmol/L] + 0.02 [40 - albumin (g/L)]) (R2 = 68.9%; 95% CI, 68.0%-69.6%) and correlated similarly to other formulas (Payne: lowest R2 = 60.3%; 95% CI, 59.3%-61.3%; and James: highest R2 = 76.7%; 95% CI, 76.1%-77.3%). When classifying patients into categories of hypocalcemia, normocalcemia, or hypercalcemia, unadjusted total calcium had the best overall agreement (74.5%) with ionized calcium compared with albumin-adjusted calcium using the original Payne and simplified Payne formulas (agreement 63.0% and 58.7%, respectively). Misclassification using the adjustment formulas was worse in the presence of hypoalbuminemia (albumin level <30 g/L). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study drawn from a contemporaneous population, there appeared to be heavy reliance on adjustment formulas for calcium in clinical practice with little gain but considerable risk of misclassification of true calcium status, especially in the presence of hypoalbuminemia. These results suggest that unadjusted total calcium was the best and most practical alternative to ionized calcium.

Indexed as

CalciumHypercalcemiaHypocalcemiaSerum AlbuminAgedAlbertaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedCalciumSerum Albumin

Identifiers

PMID39836424
PMCPMC11751745

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.