Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 798

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Urine Output Assessment as a Clinical Quality Measure

Macedo, Etienne·2015·Nephron

Abstract

Urine output (UO) is a relevant marker of kidney function and an independent marker of serum creatinine. Although oliguria can be the result of transitory changes in volume status or due to external influences, such as drug administration, UO is currently included as a criterion to diagnose and stage acute kidney injury (AKI). In clinical practice, the potential of earlier alert of kidney injury with frequent assessment of UO can help patient screening and risk assessment. In this review, we will discuss recent studies applying UO for AKI diagnosis and prognostication and propose methods to assess UO and improve quality of care.

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 · 10.1159/000437312

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

See all 798

Metadata

Authors
Macedo, E.
Venue
Nephron
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2015
Volume
131
Issue
4
Pages
252-254
ISSN
  • 1660-8151 (ISSN-L)
  • 2235-3186
OpenAlex
W2287281503
Cited by
798
References
0
FWCI
76.82
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: Urine Output Assessment as a Clinical Quality Measure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1159/000437312
The paper
Macedo, E. (2015). Urine Output Assessment as a Clinical Quality Measure. Nephron. https://doi.org/10.1159/000437312

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.