Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15106229›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2004

Interventions for preventing infection in nephrotic syndrome.

H M Wu, J L Tang, Z H Sha, L Cao, Y P Li

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Interventions for preventing infection in nephrotic syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Nephrotic syndrome in adults.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2008
    Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

H M WuChinese Cochrane Center, Department of Gerontology, West China Hospital, Si Chuan University, Chengdu, Si Chuan, China, 610041.
J L Tang
Z H Sha
L Cao
Y P Li
Sichuan University · CNChinese University of Hong Kong · CNWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfection is one of the most common complications and still remains a significant cause of morbidity and occasionally mortality in patients, especially children with nephrotic syndrome. Many different prophylactic interventions have been used or recommended for reducing the risks of infection in nephrotic syndrome in clinical practice. Whether the existing evidence is scientifically rigorous and which prophylactic intervention can be recommended for routine use based on the current evidence is still unknown.

objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of any prophylactic interventions for reducing the risk of infection in children and adults with nephrotic syndrome. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Renal Group Specialised Register (January 2003), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2003), MEDLINE and Pre-MEDLINE (1966 - February 2003), EMBASE (1980 - February 2003), China Biological Medicine Database (CBMdisc, 1979 - December 2002), reference lists of nephrology textbooks, review articles, relevant trials and abstracts from nephrology scientific meetings without language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any prophylactic interventions (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) for preventing any infection in children and adults with nephrotic syndrome. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed and extracted information. Information was collected on method, participants, interventions and outcomes ( appearance of infection, mortality, quality of life and adverse events). MAIN

resultsFive RCTs conducted in China, including 308 children with nephrotic syndrome were identified. No trials were identified in adults. All trials compared one kind of prophylactic pharmacotherapy (IVIG, thymosin or a compound of Chinese medicinal herbs - TIAOJINING) in addition to baseline treatment with baseline treatment alone. No RCTs were identified comparing antibiotic or non-pharmacological prophylaxis, or pneumococcal vaccination. Three trials showed a significantly better effect of IVIG on preventing nosocomial or unspecified infection in children with nephrotic syndrome (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.82). Thymosin and TIAOJINING were also effective for reducing the risks of infection in children with nephrotic syndrome with RR 0.50 (95%CI 0.26 to 0.97) and 0.59 (95%CI 0.43 to 0.81) respectively. No serious adverse events were reported. REVIEWERS'

conclusionsIVIG, thymosin and TIAOJINING may have positive effects on prevention of nosocomial or unspecified infection with no obvious serious adverse events in children with nephrotic syndrome. However the methodological quality of all trials was poor, the sample sizes small and all studies were from China, and thus there is no strong evidence on the effectiveness of these interventions.

Indexed as

Bacterial InfectionsChildCross InfectionHumansNephrotic SyndromeRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID15106229
OpenAlexW4232493181

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.