↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of creatinine-based and cystatin C-based equations for estimation of glomerular filtration rate in type 1 diabetic patients

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
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
Evaluation of creatinine-based and cystatin C-based equations for estimation of glomerular filtration rate in type 1 diabetic patients
Published in
Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, February 2016
DOI 10.1590/2359-3997000000151
Pubmed ID
Authors

Domingueti, Caroline Pereira, Fóscolo, Rodrigo Bastos, Simões e Silva, Ana Cristina, Dusse, Luci Maria S., Reis, Janice Sepúlveda, Carvalho, Maria das Graças, Fernandes, Ana Paula, Gomes, Karina Braga, Domingueti, Caroline Pereira, Fóscolo, Rodrigo Bastos, Simões e Silva, Ana Cristina, Dusse, Luci Maria S., Reis, Janice Sepúlveda, Carvalho, Maria das Graças, Fernandes, Ana Paula, Gomes, Karina Braga

Abstract

Objective Several formulas based in different biomarkers may be used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GRF). However, all of them have some limitations, and it is very important to evaluate their performances in different groups of patients. Therefore, we compared GFR, as estimated by creatinine-based and cystatin C-based equations, according to albuminuria, in type 1 diabetes (T1DM), in an observational case-control study. Subjects and methods T1DM patients were classified according to albuminuria: normoalbuminuric (n = 63), microalbuminuric (n = 30), macroalbuminuric (n = 32). GFR was calculated using creatinine-based and cystatin C-based (aMDRD, CKD-EPIcr, CKD-EPIcys, MacIsaac, Tan and CKD-EPIcrcys) equations. Spearman Correlation was used to evaluate the correlation of GFR estimated by the formulas with albuminuria. ROC curves were constructed to compare AUCs of GFR estimated by equations, in reference to macroalbuminuria. Sensibility, specificity and accuracy were calculated for a cut-off < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Results GFR estimated by creatinine-based and cystatin C-based equations significantly differed among normoalbuminuric, microalbuminuric and macroalbuminuric patients. Spearman correlation and AUCs of GFR estimated by creatinine-based and cystatin C-based formulas were very similar to each other, though cystatin C-based equations presented better correlation with albuminuria and higher AUCs than the creatinine-based ones, and the best accuracy to detect macroalbuminuric patients. Conclusion Although GFR estimated by all creatinine-based and cystatin C-based equations permitted the differentiation between T1DM patients, according to albuminuria, cystatin C-based equations presented best accuracy to detect macroalbuminuria in T1DM patients and should be considered in the clinical routine in order to increase the possibility of early diagnostic of chronic renal disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Professor 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 15 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 21%
Unspecified 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 May 2016.
All research outputs
#18,459,684
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#163
of 259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,176
of 297,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 259 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 297,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.