The DOI matches its Crossref record.
UROLOGIC DISEASES IN AMERICA PROJECT: UROLITHIASIS
Abstract
PURPOSE: We quantified the burden of urolithiasis in the United States by identifying trends in the use of health care resources and estimating the economic impact of the disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analytical methods used to generate these results have been described previously. RESULTS: The rate of national inpatient hospitalizations for a diagnosis of urolithiasis decreased by 15% and hospital length of stay decreased from 2.6 to 2.2 days between 1994 and 2000. Rates of hospitalization were 2.5 to 3-fold higher for Medicare beneficiaries with little change between 1992 and 1998. Almost 2 million outpatient visits for a primary diagnosis of urolithiasis were recorded in 2000. Hospital outpatient visits increased by 40% between 1994 and 2000 and physician office visits increased by 43% between 1992 and 2000. In the Medicare population hospital outpatient and office visits increased by 29% and 41%, respectively, between 1992 and 1998. The distribution of surgical procedures remained relatively stable through the 1990s. Shock wave lithotripsy was the most commonly performed procedure, followed closely by ureteroscopy. Overall the total estimated annual expenditure for individuals with claims for a diagnosis of urolithiasis was almost $2.1 billion in 2000, representing a 50% increase since 1994. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of urolithiasis is estimated at almost $2 billion annually and it appears to be increasing with time despite a shift in inpatient to outpatient treatment and the emergence of minimally invasive treatment modalities, perhaps because the prevalence of stone disease is increasing.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Assimos, D., Krambeck, A., Miller, N. L., Monga, M., Murad, M. H., Nelson, C. P., Pace, K. T., Pais, V. M., Pearle, M. S., Preminger, G. M., et al. (2016) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.090 · Cited by 1,457
Self-citationMetabolic Evaluation and Recurrence Prevention for Urinary Stone Patients: EAU Guidelines
Skolarikos, A., Straub, M., Knoll, T., Sarica, K., Seitz, C., Petřík, A., & Türk, C. (2015) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.029 · Cited by 409
Calcium and phosphate homeostasis: Concerted interplay of new regulators
Renkema, K. Y., Alexander, R. T., Bindels, R. J., & Hoenderop, J. G. (2008) · Annals of Medicine · doi:10.1080/07853890701689645 · Cited by 263
Moore, C. L., Bomann, S., Daniels, B., Luty, S., Molinaro, A., Singh, D., & Gross, C. P. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g2191 · Cited by 157
(1987) · Australian universities' review
Metadata
- Authors
- PEARLE, M. S., CALHOUN, E. A., CURHAN, G. C., & the UROLOGIC DISEASES OF AMERICA PROJECT
- Venue
- Journal of Urology
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 173
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 848-857
- ISSN
- 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-3792
- OpenAlex
- W2046492941
- Cited by
- 941
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 13.32
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: UROLOGIC DISEASES IN AMERICA PROJECT: UROLITHIASIS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.ju.0000152082.14384.d7
- The paper
- PEARLE, M. S., CALHOUN, E. A., CURHAN, G. C., & the UROLOGIC DISEASES OF AMERICA PROJECT. (2005). UROLOGIC DISEASES IN AMERICA PROJECT: UROLITHIASIS. Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000152082.14384.d7
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.