ArticleScientific reports2025
Variability and misclassification of albuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex Differences in the Cardiovascular Significance of Albuminuria in Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Urinary Extracellular Vesicle-Derived miRNAs as Regulators and Biomarkers in Diabetic Kidney Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Biomarkers in Diabetic Kidney Disease: Early Detection, Prognostic Assessment, and Integration with Multi-Omics Signatures.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Intra-Individual Variability of Urinary EGF and Clusterin, and Effect of Frozen Storage on Stability: Results from UVALID.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Association of 14-day continuous glucose monitoring-derived postprandial hyperglycemic area with 6-month change in urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- From albuminuria to multi-omics signatures: emerging biomarkers and drug targets for early-stage chronic kidney disease.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measurement of albuminuria is central in assessment, staging and evaluation of treatment response of diabetic kidney disease. Due to high intra-individual variability of albuminuria, guidelines recommend specific sampling intervals and usually agreement of two out of three samples for correct staging. Nevertheless, different confirmation and staging strategies have been proposed for albuminuria assessment. We report albumin-to-creatine ratio measurements of spot urine samples in a modern European cohort (n = 773) of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in a primary care setting. Information on albuminuria, its variability and associated baseline characteristics are presented. The amount of "misclassification" of alternative staging strategies compared to the guideline recommended gold standard is reported. Additionally, we applied quantile regression to estimate the conditional quantiles of the second and third measurement, allowing an estimation of likely variability at a given albuminuria level. Overall, the coefficient of variation of albumin-to-creatinine ratio, as a measure of variability, is high with a median of 41%. This variability leads in part to substantial disagreement of alternative staging strategies with the gold standard. In general, higher variability of albuminuria seems to be associated with more severe kidney disease. The high variability of albuminuria necessitates caution and consideration for adequate clinical use. In this study, we provide data regarding the expected variability, correct usage and limitations of albuminuria in a modern primary care diabetes mellitus population.
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.