Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 354

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Kidney stones and kidney function loss: a cohort study

Open access
Alexander, R. T., Hemmelgarn, B. R., Wiebe, N., Bello, A., Morgan, C., Samuel, S., Klarenbach, S. W., Curhan, G. C., Tonelli, M., for the Alberta Kidney Disease Network·2012·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the presence of kidney stones increase the risk of end stage renal disease (ESRD) or other adverse renal outcomes. DESIGN: A registry cohort study using validated algorithms based on claims and facility utilisation data. Median follow-up of 11 years. SETTING: Alberta, Canada, between 1997 and 2009. PARTICIPANTS: 3,089,194 adult patients without ESRD at baseline or a history of pyelonephritis. Of these, 1,954,836 had outpatient serum creatinine measurements and were included in analyses of chronic kidney disease and doubling of serum creatinine level. EXPOSURE: One or more kidney stones during follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incident ESRD, development of stage 3b-5 chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <45 mL/min/1.73 m(2)), and sustained doubling of serum creatinine concentration from baseline. RESULTS: 23,706 (0.8%) patients had at least one kidney stone, 5333 (0.2%) developed ESRD, 68,525 (4%) developed stage 3b-5 chronic kidney disease, and 6581 (0.3%) experienced sustained doubling of serum creatinine. Overall, one or more stone episodes during follow-up was associated with increased risk of ESRD (adjusted hazard ratio 2.16 (95% CI 1.79 to 2.62)), new stage 3b-5 chronic kidney disease (hazard ratio 1.74 (1.61 to 1.88)), and doubling of serum creatinine (hazard ratio 1.94 (1.56 to 2.43)), all compared with those without kidney stones during follow-up. The excess risk of adverse outcomes associated with at least one episode of stones seemed greater in women than in men, and in people aged <50 years than in those aged ≥ 50. However, the risks of all three adverse outcomes in those with at least one episode of stones were significantly higher than in those without stones in both sexes and age strata. The absolute increase in the rate of adverse renal outcomes associated with stones was small: the unadjusted rate of ESRD was 2.48 per million person days in people with one or more episodes of stones versus 0.52 per million person days in people without stones. CONCLUSION: Even a single kidney stone episode during follow-up was associated with a significant increase in the likelihood of adverse renal outcomes including ESRD. However, the increases were small in absolute terms.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.e5287

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Alexander, R. T., Hemmelgarn, B. R., Wiebe, N., Bello, A., Morgan, C., Samuel, S., Klarenbach, S. W., Curhan, G. C., Tonelli, M., & for the Alberta Kidney Disease Network
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-08-29
Volume
345
Issue
aug29 2
Pages
e5287-e5287
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2118744783
Cited by
354
References
2
FWCI
13.04
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

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.