Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flow chart of the study participant selection.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study population (study sample n = 20,759).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Diagnostic accuracy of urine dipstick results for detections of ACR ≥30 mg/g and ACR >300 mg/g (study sample n = 20,759).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Reclassification across CKD risk categories based on the eGFR and ACR results from those based on the eGFR and dipstick results (analyzed n = 19,966).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Performance of urine dipstick in estimating the CKD risk categories compared to albumin:creatinine ratio.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 4.

Comparison of prediction for EQ-5D index between CKD risk categories based on the eGFR and ACR results and those based on the eGFR and dipstick results (analyzed n = 19,024).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 3.

CKD-specific, non-fatal burden of disease (per 100,000 years).

The values were calculated as the prevalence of each risk category multiplied by the mean difference of EQ-5D index from the reference without CKD: by the age and sex-adjusted difference (A) and by the age, sex, hypertension, and diabetes-adjusted difference (B).

More »

Fig 3 Expand