ReviewKidney international2008
Negative trials in nephrology: what can we learn?
Review in Kidney international, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Measuring quality of life in trials including patients on haemodialysis: methodological issues surrounding the use of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The landscape of clinical trials in nephrology: a systematic review of Clinicaltrials.gov.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2014Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Nutritional treatment in chronic kidney disease: the concept of nephroprotection.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2015Review
- Metabolic changes in summer active and anuric hibernating free-ranging brown bears (Ursus arctos).PloS one · 2013Article
- Hemodialysis vascular access monitoring: current concepts.Hemodialysis international. International Symposium on Home Hemodialysis · 2009Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chronic kidney disease is assuming epidemic proportions, and an increasing number of clinical trials are testing treatments developed to improve morbidity and mortality. Surprisingly, however, a large proportion of these trials have had negative or neutral results. When trials unexpectedly demonstrate either no benefit or a detrimental impact of a treatment, especially when that treatment is already used in practice, critics commonly argue that the results were dictated by flawed trial design rather than the intrinsic properties of the treatment. In kidney disease therapeutics, trials commonly rely on observational data and test the hypothesis that these associations may be extrapolated to cause-and-effect. Other key issues in trial design that may affect outcomes include the impact of enrolling relatively healthier subjects, the complexity of recruiting participants with specific characteristics while maintaining generalizability, and the subtleties of event adjudication and quality of life assessments. In this article, general principles of trial design will be discussed and the potential lessons learned from recent trials in nephrology will be critically reviewed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.