ArticlePloS one2026
Phase angle as a predictor of nutritional status and quality of life in hemodialysis patients.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveHemodialysis (HD) patients are at high risk for protein-energy wasting and cellular membrane deterioration, which significantly impact their clinical outcomes. Phase angle (PhA) is an objective parameter for assessing nutritional status. As PhA is an indicator of physical function and cellular health, it is hypothesized to correlate with Quality of Life (QoL). This study was carried out to determine the relationship between the PhA and the nutritional status and QoL in patients receiving HD treatment.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted with 98 patients. Nutritional Risk Score-2002 (NRS-2002) and Malnutrition Inflammation Score (MIS) scales were used to assess the nutritional status of the patients. Physical activity level and QoL were determined by the Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form (IPAQ-SF) and Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form-36 (KDQOLTM-36), respectively. The body composition of the patients was measured by Inbody S10 and the PhA value was also obtained from this measurement.
resultsThe mean PhA value of the patients was determined as 5.1˚ ± 1.1˚. As a result of the ROC analysis performed using the NRS-2002, the PhA cutoff point was calculated as 4.85˚. It was observed that patients with a PhA less than 4.85˚ had higher MIS and NRS-2002 scores than patients with a PhA greater than this value. KDQOLTM-36 physical and mental component sub-dimension scores of patients with PhA greater than 4.85˚ were found to be higher than those of patients with a PhA less than 4.85˚. It has also been determined that patients with a PhA less than 4.85˚ have a more sedentary lifestyle than patients with a PhA greater than this value.
conclusionsPhA is a useful parameter in determining nutritional status and QoL in HD patients. Therefore, PhA may serve as a supportive parameter for evaluating the nutritional and functional status of HD patients in clinical settings.
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.