| Title |
Validation of a urine color scale for assessment of urine osmolality in healthy children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nutrition, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00394-015-0905-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stavros A. Kavouras, Evan C. Johnson, Dimitris Bougatsas, Giannis Arnaoutis, Demosthenes B. Panagiotakos, Erica Perrier, Alexis Klein |
| Abstract |
Urine color (UC) is a practical tool for hydration assessment. The technique has been validated in adults, but has not been tested in children. The purpose of the study was to test the validity of the urine color scale in young, healthy boys and girls, as a marker of urine concentration, investigate its diagnostic ability of detecting hypohydration and examine the ability of children to self-assess UC. A total of 210 children participated (age: 8-14 years, body mass: 43.4 ± 12.6 kg, height: 1.49 ± 0.13 m, body fat: 25.2 ± 7.8 %). Data collection included: two single urine samples (first morning and before lunch) and 24-h sampling. Hydration status was assessed via urine osmolality (UOsmo) and UC via the eight-point color scale. Mean UC was 3 ± 1 and UOsmo 686 ± 223 mmol kg(-1). UC displayed a positive relationship as a predictor of UOsmo (R (2): 0.45, P < 0.001). Based on the receiver operating curve, UC has good overall classification ability for the three samples (area under the curve 85-92 %), with good sensitivity (92-98 %) and specificity (55-68 %) for detecting hypohydration. The overall accuracy of the self-assessment of UC in the morning or the noon samples ranged from 67 to 78 %. Further threshold analysis indicated that the optimal self-assessed UC threshold for hypohydration was ≥4. The classical eight-point urine color scale is a valid method to assess hydration in children of age 8-14 years, either by researchers or self-assessment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 10% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 50% |
| Scientists | 5 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Greece | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 158 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 12% |
| Researcher | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 31 | 19% |
| Unknown | 45 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 19% |
| Sports and Recreations | 28 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 13% |
| Unknown | 48 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 09 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,442,218
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nutrition
#398
of 2,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,600
of 280,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nutrition
#9
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,713 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 280,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.