MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408535715 · doi:10.1093/ejendo/lvaf054

Big data determination and validation of reference range for 24 hour urine cortisol by LCMS/MS

2025· article· en· W4408535715 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gregory Kline, Erik Venos, Doris M. Campbell, Alexander A. C. Leung, Danny Orton

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Endocrinology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUrineReference rangeConfidence intervalPopulationReference valuesProspective cohort studyInternal medicineUrine sampleRetrospective cohort studyBody mass indexEndocrinologyUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Twenty-four-hour urine-free cortisol (UFC) is a first-line test for Cushing syndrome (CS). A new mass spectrometry assay for UFC requires a validated, relevant reference range appropriate to a screening population. DESIGN: Combined retrospective and prospective cohort study in a government health system and tertiary endocrinology clinic, Canada. Participants were patients with potential features of CS. METHODS: The refineR reference interval algorithm was used to derive a middle 95%ile reference interval from 4830 UFC results in non-CS patients, compared with 120 prospective patients where evaluation excluded CS. RESULTS: Urine-free cortisol and 24-h urine volume were correlated (r = 0.28, P < .0001). There was no significant difference between the volume-corrected UFC distributions in the prospective vs retrospective populations (P = .09). Urine-free cortisol distribution was highly skewed (P < .0001) and showed strong sex interaction. The refineR-generated adult male UFC upper reference limit was 238 nmol/day (86.3 μg/day) and for females was 147 nmol/day (53.3 μg/day); urine volume-corrected, the upper limits were 89 nmol/L (32.3 μg/L) and 91 nmol/L (32.9 μg/L), respectively. Applied to both populations, between 3% and 8% of all results would be flagged high; most are expected to represent nonneoplastic (pseudo)Cushing's. CONCLUSIONS: We used mass population data, where the prevalence of CS was likely very rare, plus a carefully phenotyped sample where CS was considered but excluded, to derive a validated reference interval for 24-h UFC by mass spectrometry in populations that reflect real-world use of the test. Given the highly skewed upper tail of the population distribution, it is probable that high test specificity for CS will require multimodality diagnostic confirmation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of EndocrinologySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207