English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study aimed to determine the differences arising form indexing a measured physiological variable by using different body surface area (BSA) estimation formulae.\ud\udThe studied variables were the overall measured peritoneal creatinine clearance plus residual renal clearances (MeasCtCl) of 19 men and 23 women in a stable condition who were undergoing peritoneal dialysis and were a mean 55.7 ± 15.8 and 55.1 ± 14.1 years of age, respectively. The patients had comparable body mass indexes (BMIs; 25.01 ± 4.14 in men and 24.5 ± 3.46 in women). The MeasCtCls were indexed to 1.73 m² using 5 formulae: by Du Bois, Boyd, Mosteller, Livingston and Yu. The numerical and percentage differences between the MeasCtCl values and each approach to indexation were calculated, as well as the differences between the indexations. Paired t-test and similarity percentage test were used to evaluate the significance of the differences.\ud\udThe impossibility of adequately comparing data indexed according to different BSA estimation formulae was shown, documenting a high risk of erroneous evaluations and conclusions.\ud\udSome methods to avoid these errors in clinical applications are suggested, as well as the possibility of indexing only to height

Impossibility of Comparing Data of Indexed Peritoneal Creatinine Clearance when Different Formulae of Body Surface Area are Used