Spot Urine Formulas to Estimate 24-Hour Urinary Sodium Excretion Alter the Dietary Sodium and Blood Pressure Relationship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated the relationship between estimated 24-hour urinary sodium excretion from the Kawasaki, Tanaka, and INTERSALT (International Study of Sodium, Potassium, and Blood Pressure) formulas and blood pressure (BP). We pooled 10 034 person-visit data from 3 cohort studies in Bangladesh that had measured 24-hour urine sodium (m-24hUNa), potassium, creatinine excretion, and BP. We used m-24hUNa, potassium, and creatinine where necessary, rather than spot urine values in the formulas. Bland-Altman plots were used to determine the bias associated with formula-estimated sodium relative to m-24hUNa. We compared the sodium excretion and BP relationships from m-24hUNa versus formula-estimated sodium excretions, using restricted cubic spline plots for adjusted multilevel linear models. All formulas overestimated 24-hour sodium at lower levels but underestimated 24-hour sodium at higher levels. There was a linear relationship between m-24hUNa excretion and systolic BP, while estimated sodium excretion from all 3 formulas had a J-shaped relationship with systolic BP. The relationships between urine sodium excretion and diastolic BP were more complex but were also altered by using formulas. All formulas had associations with BP when a sex-specific constant sodium concentration was inserted in place of measured sodium. Since we used the m-24hUNa, potassium, and creatinine concentrations in formulas, the J-shaped relationships are due to intrinsic problems in the formulas, not due to spot urine sampling. Formula-estimated 24-hour urine sodium excretion should not be used to examine the relationship between sodium excretion and BP since they alter the real associations.
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 | 0.001 | 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".