ArticleEndocrinology, diabetes & metabolism2026
Comparison of Serum Uric Acid and Serum Uric Acid-to-Creatinine Ratio as Indicators of Metabolic Syndrome: A Cross-Sectional Study in China.
Article in Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to systematically compare the roles of both serum uric acid (SUA) and Serum uric acid to creatine ratio (SUACr) as indicators of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in general populations.
methodsInformation used here was gathered from a cross-sectional investigation focusing on NHAR, about cardiovascular disease risk factors and prevalence. Dose-response relation between SUA, SUACr and MetS was evaluated using RCS model. Moreover, a logistic regression modelling was generated to evaluate the relation among SUA, SUACr and MetS within the total population.
resultsA total of 10,217 subjects aged 18 and over were enrolled. Both SUA and SUACr were significantly associated with MetS and individual corresponding diseases in this population. Adjusted odds ratios indicated a progressive increase in the risk of MetS and individual corresponding diseases across quartiles of SUA and SUACr, all with the lowest quartile as reference for both genders (p for trend < 0.001). AUC of SUACr surpassed that for SUA in identifying MetS (0.61 vs. 0.59, p < 0.001). However, no statistical difference was observed between SUA and SUACr when stratified by gender. In men, the AUC of SUA and SUACr for MetS diagnosis were 0.61 and 0.62, respectively, while both SUA and SUACr had an AUC value of 0.62 in women.
conclusionsSUA and SUACr could serve as valuable predictors for early prevention, diagnosis and treatment of MetS in routine clinical practice. Upon gender stratification, there was no discernible statistical difference between SUA and SUACr in identifying MetS presence.
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.