The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diagnostic accuracy of spot urinary protein and albumin to creatinine ratios for detection of significant proteinuria or adverse pregnancy outcome in patients with suspected pre-eclampsia: systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of two "spot urine" tests for significant proteinuria or adverse pregnancy outcome in pregnant women with suspected pre-eclampsia. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Searches of electronic databases 1980 to January 2011, reference list checking, hand searching of journals, and contact with experts. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Diagnostic studies, in pregnant women with hypertension, that compared the urinary spot protein to creatinine ratio or albumin to creatinine ratio with urinary protein excretion over 24 hours or adverse pregnancy outcome. Study characteristics, design, and methodological and reporting quality were objectively assessed. DATA EXTRACTION: Study results relating to diagnostic accuracy were extracted and synthesised using multivariate random effects meta-analysis methods. RESULTS: Twenty studies, testing 2978 women (pregnancies), were included. Thirteen studies examining protein to creatinine ratio for the detection of significant proteinuria were included in the multivariate analysis. Threshold values for protein to creatinine ratio ranged between 0.13 and 0.5, with estimates of sensitivity ranging from 0.65 to 0.89 and estimates of specificity from 0.63 to 0.87; the area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.69. On average, across all studies, the optimum threshold (that optimises sensitivity and specificity combined) seems to be between 0.30 and 0.35 inclusive. However, no threshold gave a summary estimate above 80% for both sensitivity and specificity, and considerable heterogeneity existed in diagnostic accuracy across studies at most thresholds. No studies looked at protein to creatinine ratio and adverse pregnancy outcome. For albumin to creatinine ratio, meta-analysis was not possible. Results from a single study suggested that the most predictive result, for significant proteinuria, was with the DCA 2000 quantitative analyser (>2 mg/mmol) with a summary sensitivity of 0.94 (95% confidence interval 0.86 to 0.98) and a specificity of 0.94 (0.87 to 0.98). In a single study of adverse pregnancy outcome, results for perinatal death were a sensitivity of 0.82 (0.48 to 0.98) and a specificity of 0.59 (0.51 to 0.67). CONCLUSION: The maternal "spot urine" estimate of protein to creatinine ratio shows promising diagnostic value for significant proteinuria in suspected pre-eclampsia. The existing evidence is not, however, sufficient to determine how protein to creatinine ratio should be used in clinical practice, owing to the heterogeneity in test accuracy and prevalence across studies. Insufficient evidence is available on the use of albumin to creatinine ratio in this area. Insufficient evidence exists for either test to predict adverse pregnancy outcome.
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
Cites
WHO analysis of causes of maternal death: a systematic review
Khan, K. S., Wojdyla, D., Say, L., Gülmezoglu, A. M., & Van Look, P. F. (2006) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68397-9 · Cited by 3,978
Whiting, P., Rutjes, A. W., Reitsma, J. B., Bossuyt, P. M., & Kleijnen, J. (2003) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-25 · Cited by 3,592
Reitsma, J. B., Glas, A. S., Rutjes, A. W. S., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 · Cited by 3,369
Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41 · Cited by 3,215
Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2261021292 · Cited by 3,215
Irwig, L. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.324.7338.669 · Cited by 246
Cited by
Gestational Hypertension and Preeclampsia
(2020) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000003891 · Cited by 2,949
Brown, M. A., Magee, L. A., Kenny, L. C., Karumanchi, S. A., McCarthy, F. P., Saito, S., Hall, D. R., Warren, C. E., Adoyi, G., & Ishaku, S. (2018) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.117.10803 · Cited by 2,089
Mol, B. W. J., Roberts, C. T., Thangaratinam, S., Magee, L. A., de Groot, C. J. M., & Hofmeyr, G. J. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)00070-7 · Cited by 1,597
Practice Bulletin No. 183: postpartum hemorrhage
(2017) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000002351 · Cited by 1,406
ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 203: Chronic Hypertension in Pregnancy
(2019) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000003020 · Cited by 871
Metadata
- Authors
- Morris, R. K., Riley, R. D., Doug, M., Deeks, J. J., & Kilby, M. D.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2012-07-09
- Volume
- 345
- Issue
- jul09 1
- Pages
- e4342-e4342
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1963765713
- Cited by
- 179
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 1.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Diagnostic accuracy of spot urinary protein and albumin to creatinine ratios for detection of significant proteinuria or adverse pregnancy outcome in patients with suspected pre-eclampsia: systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.e4342
- The paper
- Morris, R. K., Riley, R. D., Doug, M., Deeks, J. J., & Kilby, M. D. (2012). Diagnostic accuracy of spot urinary protein and albumin to creatinine ratios for detection of significant proteinuria or adverse pregnancy outcome in patients with suspected pre-eclampsia: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e4342
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.