MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099792671 · doi:10.1177/2054358120970716

Performance of StatSensor Point-of-Care Device for Measuring Creatinine in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Postkidney Transplantation

2020· article· en· W3099792671 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Nataatmadja, Angela W.S. Fung, Beryl Jacobson, Jack Ferera, Eva Bernstein, Paul Komenda, André Mattman, David Seccombe, Adeera Levin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaOrthopaedic Innovation CentreSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreatinineMedicineKidney diseaseRenal functionInternal medicineUrologyFingerstickKidney transplantationNephrologyTransplantationEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The StatSensor is a point-of-care device which measures creatinine in capillary whole blood. Previous studies reported an underestimation of the creatinine measurements at high creatinine concentrations and were performed in the prestandardization era for creatinine. OBJECTIVE: This accuracy-based study evaluates the use of this device in kidney-transplanted patients and those with chronic kidney disease (CKD). DESIGN: Cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study. SETTING: Nephrology outpatient clinic in an urban tertiary center. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with CKD or a functioning kidney transplant. MEASUREMENTS: Duplicate StatSensor creatinine measurements were performed on capillary whole blood samples collected by direct fingerstick and SAFE-T-FILL collection device. Results were compared with simultaneous venous blood sampling for serum and plasma creatinine measured by an enzymatic method on the Roche Integra 400 mainframe analyzer with traceability to the ID-GC-MS (isotope dilution gas chromatography mass spectrometry) reference method. METHODS: Deming regression, Pearson correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman analysis were used to assess accuracy and comparability between capillary whole blood measured by StatSensor and plasma creatinine measured by routine analyzer with traceability to the reference method. Estimated glomerular filtration (eGFR) rates were calculated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation and concordance with Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD stage classification was evaluated. RESULTS: There were 60 participants (mean age = 61.9 ± 15.0 years, 55% men, 33% transplant, mean plasma creatinine = 137 ± 59 µmol/L). Bland-Altman analysis indicated a positive mean bias of 12.7 µmol/L between StatSensor fingerstick creatinine measurement and plasma creatinine. Comparison of eGFR (CKD-EPI) calculated from the StatSensor fingerstick creatinine versus plasma creatinine showed misclassification across all KDIGO CKD stages. Postanalytical correction of the bias did not improve misclassifications. The use of mean of duplicate StatSensor creatinine results did not improve performance compared with the use of singlet results. LIMITATIONS: Single center, limited participant numbers. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that the limiting characteristics of the StatSensor device are not only bias, but also imprecision. The level of imprecision observed may influence clinical decision-making and limit the usefulness of StatSensor as a CKD screening tool. If choosing to utilize it for either screening for or monitoring CKD, it is essential that clinicians understand the limitations of point-of-care devices and apply this knowledge to test interpretation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesFrench-language works237,207