ReviewPediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2009
Target hemoglobin trials in chronic kidney disease: design and interpretation issues.
Review in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optimal management of anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease remains a divisive issue within the nephrology community. Because the evidence provided by successive randomized controlled trials has often proven to be incongruent, it is natural to consider whether methodological issues may be responsible. Using four large trials [US Normal Hematocrit, Canadian European Normalization of Hemoglobin, Cardiovascular Risk Reduction by Early Anemia Treatment with Epoetin Beta (CREATE) and Correction of Hemoglobin and Outcomes in Renal Insufficiency (CHOIR)], this review article highlights several methodological issues that may be important when trial evidence is translated into clinical practice. Issues discussed include heterogeneity of enrollment criteria, failure to conceal treatment allocation, generalizability of study interventions, systematic use of imbalanced co-interventions [especially dose of erythropoietin stimulating agent (ESA), confusion regarding stopping rules and interim analyses and failure to account for imbalances in important patient characteristics generated at randomization.
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.