↓ Skip to main content

Is urinary density an adequate predictor of urinary osmolality?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Is urinary density an adequate predictor of urinary osmolality?
Published in
BMC Nephrology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12882-015-0038-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Carolina P Souza, Roberto Zatz, Rodrigo B de Oliveira, Mirela A R Santinho, Marcia Ribalta, João E Romão, Rosilene M Elias

Abstract

Urinary density (UD) has been routinely used for decades as a surrogate marker for urine osmolality (Uosm). We asked if UD can accurately estimate Uosm both in healthy subjects and in different clinical scenarios of kidney disease. UD was assessed by refractometry. Uosm was measured by freezing point depression in spot urines obtained from healthy volunteers (N = 97) and in 319 inpatients with acute kidney injury (N = 95), primary glomerulophaties (N = 118) or chronic kidney disease (N = 106). UD and Uosm correlated in all groups (p < 0.05). However, a wide range of Uosm values was associated with each UD value. When UD was ≤ 1.010, 28.4% of samples had Uosm above 350 mOsm/kg. Conversely, in 61.6% of samples with UD above 1.020, Uosm was below 600 mOsm/kg. As expected, Uosm exhibited a strong relationship with serum creatinine (Screat), whereas a much weaker correlation was found between UD and Screat. We found that UD is not a substitute for Uosm. Although UD was significantly correlated with Uosm, the wide dispersion makes it impossible to use UD as a dependable clinical estimate of Uosm. Evaluation of the renal concentrating ability should be based on direct determination of Uosm.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 19%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 10 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 13 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2022.
All research outputs
#12,890,971
of 23,063,209 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#949
of 2,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,876
of 265,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#15
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,063,209 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,499 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,417 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.