Accuracy and Usefulness of Select Methods for Assessing Complete Collection of 24‐Hour Urine: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-four-hour urine collection is the recommended method for estimating sodium intake. To investigate the strengths and limitations of methods used to assess completion of 24-hour urine collection, the authors systematically reviewed the literature on the accuracy and usefulness of methods vs para-aminobenzoic acid (PABA) recovery (referent). The percentage of incomplete collections, based on PABA, was 6% to 47% (n=8 studies). The sensitivity and specificity for identifying incomplete collection using creatinine criteria (n=4 studies) was 6% to 63% and 57% to 99.7%, respectively. The most sensitive method for removing incomplete collections was a creatinine index <0.7. In pooled analysis (≥2 studies), mean urine creatinine excretion and volume were higher among participants with complete collection (P<.05); whereas, self-reported collection time did not differ by completion status. Compared with participants with incomplete collection, mean 24-hour sodium excretion was 19.6 mmol higher (n=1781 specimens, 5 studies) in patients with complete collection. Sodium excretion may be underestimated by inclusion of incomplete 24-hour urine collections. None of the current approaches reliably assess completion of 24-hour urine collection.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.102 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".