Search in:

Renal Failure Volume 38, 2016 - Issue 5

Submit an article Journal homepage

Free access

3,860

Views

CrossRef citations to date

Altmetric

Clinical Study

Modification of the Schwartz equations for children increases their accuracy at eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²

Katarzyna ZachwiejaDepartment of Pediatric Nephrology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland; Correspondence[email protected]

Przemysław KorohodaFaculty Computer Science, Electronics and Telecommunications, AGH University of Science and Technology, Kraków, Poland;

Joanna Kwinta-RybickaPediatric Nephrology Department, Children’s University Hospital of Kraków, Kraków, Poland;

Monika MiklaszewskaDepartment of Pediatric Nephrology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland;

Anna MoczulskaDepartment of Pediatric Nephrology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland;

Jolanta BugajskaClinical Biochemistry Department, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland

Joanna BerskaClinical Biochemistry Department, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland

Dorota DrożdżDepartment of Pediatric Nephrology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland;

Jacek A. PietrzykDepartment of Pediatric Nephrology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland;

show all

Pages 787-798 | Received 15 Sep 2015, Accepted 25 Feb 2016, Published online: 07 Apr 2016

Cite this article
https://doi.org/10.3109/0886022X.2016.1163152
CrossMark

Full Article
Figures & data
References
Citations
Metrics
Reprints & Permissions
View PDF PDF

Figures & data

Table 1. The basic anthropometric data and filtration markers for all children and subgroups at different CKD stages, based on GFR_I results (mean value ± SD).

Download CSV Display Table

Figure 1a. The correlation between GFR_I and tested eGFR. The GFR_I value – on horizontal axis. On the vertical axes tested eGFR according to original equations: (GFR_Scr, GFR_ScrBS, GFR_F, GFR_Z, GFR_S3M, respectively). The slash line is presenting the difference ± 30% to GFR_I. The horizontal and vertical lines on plots mean values: 60 and 90 mL/min/1.73 m².

Figure 1b. The relative error (RE) plots [100% × (eGFR_X-GFR_I)/GFR_I]. The GFR_I value (in mL/min/1.73 m²) is presented on horizontal axis. The RE values [%] are shown on vertical axes. The vertical lines on plots mean values 60 and 90, the horizontal lines on plots show values −30% and +30% of RE.

Figure 1b. The relative error (RE) plots [100% × (eGFRX-GFRI)/GFRI]. The GFRI value (in mL/min/1.73 m2) is presented on horizontal axis. The RE values [%] are shown on vertical axes. The vertical lines on plots mean values 60 and 90, the horizontal lines on plots show values −30% and +30% of RE.

Figure 2a. The correlation between GFR_I and modified Schwartz equations. The GFR_I value is presented on horizontal axis. On the vertical axes corrected eGFR: (GFR_ScrT, GFR_ScrC, GFR_ScrBST, GFR_ScrBSC, GFR_ScrBST GFR_S3MT, GFR_S3MC, respectively). The GFR in mL/min/1.73 m². The horizontal and vertical lines on plots mean values: 60 and 90 mL/min/1.73 m².

Figure 2b. The relative error (RE) plots [100% × (eGFR_X-GFR_I)/GFR_I] on horizontal axis. The RE values [%] – on vertical axes. GFRx – corrected Schwartz equations corresponding to . The vertical lines on plots mean values 60 and 90 mL/min/1.73 m², the horizontal lines on plots show values −30% and +30% of RE.

Table 5. GFR_Scr versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 6. GFR_ScrT versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 7. GFR_ScrC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 8. GFR_ScrBS versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 9. GFR_ScrBST versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 10. GFR_ScrBSC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 11. GFR_S3M versus GFR_I (corresponding to Figure 1a).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 12. GFR_S3MT versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 13. GFR_S3MC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 14. The classification accuracy (CA) coefficients calculated according to EquationEq. (7)(6) for 9-field tables.

Download CSV Display Table

Table 15. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (with p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I in patients with GFR_I < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 52).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 16. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I for original and corrected equations for GFR_I < 60–90 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 85).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 17. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I in for GFR_I 90–135 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 238).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 18. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I for GFR_I ≥135 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 42).

Download CSV Display Table

Table 19. Determined coefficients a.

Download CSV Display Table

Table 20. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the tri-marker Schwartz equation of 2012.

Download CSV Display Table

Table 21. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the Schwartz equation of 2012.

Download CSV Display Table

Table 22. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the Schwartz bed-side formula of 2009.

Download CSV Display Table

Table 23. The eGFR value (mean ± SD), average relative error (RE), the 5, 50, 95 centiles of RE (50% centile equals median value), RMSRE, correlation coefficient (R) to iohexol method ( p value) and 10% and 30% accuracy in all patients (N = 417).

Download CSV Display Table

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Share icon
Back to Top

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.

People also read
Recommended articles
Cited by

To cite this article:

Reference style: APA Chicago Harvard

Citation copied to clipboard

Reference styles above use APA (6th edition), Chicago (16th edition) & Harvard (10th edition)

Download citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by citation management software including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks and Reference Manager.

Choose format: RIS BibTex RefWorks Direct Export

Choose options: Citation Citation & abstract Citation & references

Modification of the Schwartz equations for children increases their accuracy at eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²

Table 1. The basic anthropometric data and filtration markers for all children and subgroups at different CKD stages, based on GFR_I results (mean value ± SD).

Table 2. p Values for comparisons between analyzed groups.

Table 3. The diseases category in examined group (n = 353).

Table 4. The employed formulas description.

Table 5. GFR_Scr versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 6. GFR_ScrT versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 7. GFR_ScrC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 8. GFR_ScrBS versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 9. GFR_ScrBST versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 10. GFR_ScrBSC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 11. GFR_S3M versus GFR_I (corresponding to Figure 1a).

Table 12. GFR_S3MT versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 13. GFR_S3MC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 14. The classification accuracy (CA) coefficients calculated according to EquationEq. (7)(6) for 9-field tables.

Table 15. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (with p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I in patients with GFR_I < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 52).

Table 16. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I for original and corrected equations for GFR_I < 60–90 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 85).

Table 17. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I in for GFR_I 90–135 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 238).

Table 18. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I for GFR_I ≥135 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 42).

Table 19. Determined coefficients a.

Table 20. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the tri-marker Schwartz equation of 2012.

Table 21. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the Schwartz equation of 2012.

Table 22. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the Schwartz bed-side formula of 2009.

Table 23. The eGFR value (mean ± SD), average relative error (RE), the 5, 50, 95 centiles of RE (50% centile equals median value), RMSRE, correlation coefficient (R) to iohexol method ( p value) and 10% and 30% accuracy in all patients (N = 417).

Information for

Open access

Opportunities

Help and information

Your download is now in progress and you may close this window

Login or register to access this feature

Modification of the Schwartz equations for children increases their accuracy at eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m2

Figures & data

Table 1. The basic anthropometric data and filtration markers for all children and subgroups at different CKD stages, based on GFRI results (mean value ± SD).

Table 2. p Values for comparisons between analyzed groups.

Table 3. The diseases category in examined group (n = 353).

Table 4. The employed formulas description.

Table 5. GFRScr versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 1a).

Table 6. GFRScrT versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 2a).

Table 7. GFRScrC versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 2a).

Table 8. GFRScrBS versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 1a).

Table 9. GFRScrBST versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 2a).

Table 10. GFRScrBSC versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 2a).

Table 11. GFRS3M versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 1a).

Table 12. GFRS3MT versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 2a).

Table 13. GFRS3MC versus GFRI (corresponding to Figure 2a).

Table 14. The classification accuracy (CA) coefficients calculated according to EquationEq. (7)(6) for 9-field tables.

Table 15. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (with p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFRI in patients with GFRI < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N = 52).

Table 16. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFRI for original and corrected equations for GFRI < 60–90 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N = 85).

Table 17. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFRI in for GFRI 90–135 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N = 238).

Table 18. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFRI for GFRI ≥135 mL/min/1.73 m2 (N = 42).

Table 19. Determined coefficients a.

Table 20. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the tri-marker Schwartz equation of 2012.

Table 21. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the Schwartz equation of 2012.

Table 22. Original and corrected [C] coefficients for the Schwartz bed-side formula of 2009.

Table 23. The eGFR value (mean ± SD), average relative error (RE), the 5, 50, 95 centiles of RE (50% centile equals median value), RMSRE, correlation coefficient (R) to iohexol method ( p value) and 10% and 30% accuracy in all patients (N = 417).

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Related research

To cite this article:

Download citation

Information for

Open access

Opportunities

Help and information

Keep up to date

Modification of the Schwartz equations for children increases their accuracy at eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²

Table 1. The basic anthropometric data and filtration markers for all children and subgroups at different CKD stages, based on GFR_I results (mean value ± SD).

Table 5. GFR_Scr versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 6. GFR_ScrT versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 7. GFR_ScrC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 8. GFR_ScrBS versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 9. GFR_ScrBST versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 10. GFR_ScrBSC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 11. GFR_S3M versus GFR_I (corresponding to Figure 1a).

Table 12. GFR_S3MT versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 13. GFR_S3MC versus GFR_I (corresponding to ).

Table 15. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (with p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I in patients with GFR_I < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 52).

Table 16. The eGFR value, RE value, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I for original and corrected equations for GFR_I < 60–90 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 85).

Table 17. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I in for GFR_I 90–135 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 238).

Table 18. The eGFR value, RE, RE centiles, RMSRE, R (p value) and 10 and 30% of accuracy to GFR_I for GFR_I ≥135 mL/min/1.73 m² (N = 42).