Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 756

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Use of Single Voided Urine Samples to Estimate Quantitative Proteinuria

Ginsberg, Jay M., Chang, Bruce S., Matarese, Richard A., Garella, Serafino·1983·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Quantitation of urinary protein excretion is used extensively for diagnostic and prognostic purposes and to assess the effects of therapy. The method most commonly used to measure urinary protein relies on 24-hour urine collections, which are time consuming, cumbersome, and often inaccurate. We reasoned that the urinary protein/creatinine ratio in a single voided urine sample should correlate well with the quantity of protein in timed urine collections. In a study of 46 specimens we found an excellent correlation between the protein content of a 24-hour urine collection and the protein/creatinine ratio in a single urine sample. The best correlation was found when samples were collected after the first voided morning specimen and before bedtime. We conclude that the determination of the protein/creatinine ratio in single urine samples obtained during normal daylight activity, when properly interpreted by taking into consideration the effect of different rates of creatinine excretion, can replace the 24-hour urine collection in the clinical quantitation of proteinuria. In the presence of stable renal function, a protein/creatinine ratio of more than 3.5 (mg/mg) can be taken to represent "nephrotic-range" proteinuria, and a ratio of less than 0.2 is within normal limits.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm198312223092503

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Ginsberg, J. M., Chang, B. S., Matarese, R. A., & Garella, S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1983-12-22
Volume
309
Issue
25
Pages
1543-1546
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2323304773
Cited by
756
References
0
FWCI
6.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.