Journal of Nutrition

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Journal of Nutrition Vol. 73 No. 1 January 1961, pp. 47-52
Copyright © 1961 by American Society for Nutrition
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Powell, R. C.
Right arrow Articles by Baker, E. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Powell, R. C.
Right arrow Articles by Baker, E. M., III

The Use of Nitrogen to Creatinine Ratios in Random Urine Specimens to Estimate Dietary Protein1

Richard C. Powell, Irvin C. Plough and Eugene M. Baker, III

United States Army Medical Research and Nutrition Laboratory, Fitzsimons General Hospital, Denver, Colorado

In this study, we have considered the use of nitrogen/creatinine ratios (grams of nitrogen per gram of creatinine) in random urine samples to estimate dietary protein. With diets varying from 80 to 125 grams of protein, we compared the accuracy of 3-, 4-, and 5-hour timed urinary nitrogen excretion with nitrogen/creatinine ratios determined from the same samples in the prediction of nitrogen intake. Although 24-hour urinary nitrogen gave the best correlation, we found little difference in results when comparing 4-hour urinary nitrogen with the ratios. Difficulties from diurnal variation of nitrogen excretion were reduced by the use of ratios, but the variability in creatinine excretion among individuals raised other problems. It is concluded that for surveys of large groups of individuals the use of nitrogen/creatinine ratios in random urine samples to estimate protein intake merits further consideration.


1 Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Institute of Nutrition, Chicago, 1960.

Manuscript received 11 August 1960.





Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]