ArticleAmerican journal of veterinary research2026
Evaluation of a point-of-care device for creatinine measurement in nonazotemic pigs presented to a referral hospital.
Article in American journal of veterinary research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To compare creatinine concentrations measured using a point-of-care unit (Nova StatSensor; NSS) to those from a comparison method (CM) chemistry analyzer from pigs presented at a referral institution. Methods: A clinical prospective study was performed including 61 pigs admitted to Cornell Nemo Farm Animal Hospital for clinical reasons. Heparinized blood samples were obtained by venous aspiration, and whole-blood samples were obtained via ear prick. Creatinine concentrations were subsequently measured in triplicate on the NSS (on heparinized venous samples [NSSven] and ear prick samples [NSSear]) and compared to the CM. Paired t tests and intraclass correlation coefficients were performed. A Bland-Altman plot was graphed based on a linear mixed-effects model to estimate agreement between tests. Equivalence testing was performed. Results: NSSven (n = 110) and NSSear (71) from 61 nonazotemic pigs were analyzed. The mean creatinine ± SD was 1.3 ± 0.52 mg/dL from the CM, 1.1 ± 0.43 mg/dL from the NSSven, and 1.2 ± 0.42 mg/dL from the NSSear. Bias existed between average NSSven (-0.17 mg/dL) and NSSear (-0.21 mg/dL) and the CM. The 95% CI of the limit of agreement between the NSSven and CM was -0.88 to 0.54 and -1.04 to 0.62 between the NSSear and CM. The tests were not equivalent at 0.3 mg/dL. Conclusions: The NSSven, NSSear, and CM results are different and not equivalent in nonazotemic pigs. Clinical Relevance: The use of this device for screening of creatinine in pigs is discouraged based on the results in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.