Cited by 369Thermoregulation and physiological responsesClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlElectrolyte and hormonal disorders

Biological variation and diagnostic accuracy of dehydration assessment markers

Open access
Cheuvront, Samuel N, Ely, Brett R, Kenefick, Robert W, Sawka, Michael N·2010·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background Well-recognized markers for static (one time) or dynamic (monitoring over time) dehydration assessment have not been rigorously tested for their usefulness in clinical, military, and sports medicine communities. Objective This study evaluated the components of biological variation and the accuracy of potential markers in plasma, urine, saliva, and body mass (B(m)) for static and dynamic dehydration assessment. Design We studied 18 healthy volunteers (13 men and 5 women) while carefully controlling hydration and numerous preanalytic factors. Biological variation was determined over 3 consecutive days by using published methods. Atypical values based on statistical deviations from a homeostatic set point were examined. Measured deviations in body fluid were produced by using a separate, prospective dehydration experiment and evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to quantify diagnostic accuracy. Results All dehydration markers displayed substantial individuality and one-half of the dehydration markers displayed marked heterogeneity of intraindividual variation. Decision levels for all dehydration markers were within one SD of the ROC criterion values, and most levels were nearly identical to the prospective group means after volunteers were dehydrated by 1.8-7.0% of B(m). However, only plasma osmolality (P(osm)) showed statistical promise for use in the static dehydration assessment. A diagnostic decision level of 301 plusmn 5 mmol/kg was propo…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3945/ajcn.2010.29490

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Reduced fluid intake raises the osmolality of serum and plasma.

    “When we take in too little fluid (drink too little) the fluid within and around our cells becomes more concentrated, raising the osmolality of serum and plasma (221)(222)(223)(224).”
  • Cheuvront et al.'s suggested threshold is that serum or plasma osmolality >300 mOsm/kg is classified as dehydrated.

    “Their suggested threshold is that serum or plasma osmolality >300 mOsm/kg is classified as dehydrated.”
  • Cheuvront et al. assessed the range of plasma osmolality in hydrated younger adults and then in the same persons when dehydrated, identifying the cut-off that best separated the two states.

    “They assessed the range of plasma osmolality in hydrated younger adults, then in the same persons who had been dehydrated, identifying the cut-off that best separated the two states.”
  • Volume depletion occurs without raised serum or plasma osmolality.

    “Volume depletion (reduced volume of extracellular fluids only, due to loss of fluids and electrolytes, also called salt loss or extracellular dehydration) occurs without raised serum or plasma osmolality”
  • Cheuvront et al. (221) appear to have developed the most rigorous assessment of threshold values of serum osmolality.

    “Threshold values of serum osmolality have been assessed in varied ways, but Cheuvront et al. (221) appear to have developed these most rigorously.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheuvront, S. N., Ely, B. R., Kenefick, R. W., & Sawka, M. N.
Affiliations
U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine (US)
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-09
Volume
92
Issue
3
Pages
565-573
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1997497052
Cited by
367
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 23
FWCI
11.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Thermoregulation and physiological responses
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Electrolyte and hormonal disorders
Keywords
dehydration assessment, biological variation, plasma osmolality, urine specific gravity, body mass, reference change value, diagnostic accuracy, within-person variability, fluid balance, military medicine, sports medicine
MeSH terms
Adult, Body Weight, Dehydration, Female, Humans, Male, Osmolar Concentration, Prospective Studies, Reference Values, ROC Curve, Saliva, Specific Gravity, Biomarkers, Young Adult

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