Determination of the association of urine prostate specific antigen levels with anthropometric variables in children aged 5-14 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Calculation of PSA is possible in human fluids even if it presents in very low concentrations with the help of hypersensitive immunodiagnostic methods. The periurethral glands represent one of the potential sources of urine prostate specific antigen (uPSA) in both sexes but the purpose of studying PSA levels in children is still unclear in the literature. In this pilot study we studied uPSA in a small cohort of normal, pre and post pubertal children, in relation to standard anthropometric variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study cohort consisted of 58 children 5-14 years old (42 boys/16 girls). Height, weight, body mass index (BMI) and the respective stature-for-age, weight-for-age and BMI-for-age percentiles of the sample were determined. uPSA levels were measured using a third generation immunodiagnostic method (DPC Immulite that has a lower limit of detection of 3 ng/L. When levels of PSA were above the upper limit of detection, uPSA levels were assessed using the ROCHE technique. RESULTS: uPSA levels tend to be higher in male than female children (p = 0.091, linear regression analysis). uPSA was measurable only in 3/16 girls (18.75%). Measurable uPSA was found in 18/42 boys (42.8%). The range of urine PSA in boys was 0-161000 ng/L (mean 10561.9 +/- 31830.48 ng/L). Statistical analysis with linear regression showed correlation with height and age in boys. CONCLUSIONS: The use of hypersensitive assays allows calculation of uPSA in childhood. The values of this variable are measurable in both sexes and related with gender. In boys, uPSA was correlated with age and height but not with other variables tested. Further studies are required to clarify this field.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".