| Title |
Decline of kidney function during the pre-dialysis period in chronic kidney disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s153367 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cynthia J Janmaat, Merel van Diepen, Cheyenne CE van Hagen, Joris I Rotmans, Friedo W Dekker, Olaf M Dekkers |
| Abstract |
Substantial heterogeneity exists in reported kidney function decline in pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD). By design, kidney function decline can be studied in CKD 3-5 cohorts or dialysis-based studies. In the latter, patients are selected based on the fact that they initiated dialysis, possibly leading to an overestimation of the true underlying kidney function decline in the pre-dialysis period. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the kidney function decline during pre-dialysis in CKD stage 3-5 patients, in these two different study types. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane to identify eligible studies reporting an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline (mL/min/1.73 m2) in adult pre-dialysis CKD patients. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to obtain weighted mean annual eGFR decline. We included 60 studies (43 CKD 3-5 cohorts and 17 dialysis-based studies). The meta-analysis yielded a weighted annual mean (95% CI) eGFR decline during pre-dialysis of 2.4 (95% CI: 2.2, 2.6) mL/min/1.73 m2 in CKD 3-5 cohorts compared to 8.5 (95% CI: 6.8, 10.1) in dialysis-based studies (difference 6.0 [95% CI: 4.8, 7.2]). To conclude, dialysis-based studies report faster mean annual eGFR decline during pre-dialysis than CKD 3-5 cohorts. Thus, eGFR decline data from CKD 3-5 cohorts should be used to guide clinical decision making in CKD patients and for power calculations in randomized controlled trials with CKD progression during pre-dialysis as the outcome. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 19% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2018.
All research outputs
#14,128,047
of 23,083,773 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#418
of 728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,685
of 326,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#18
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,083,773 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.