Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21660314›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of nephrology2011

Acute kidney injury: controversies revisited.

Kenneth Yong, Gursharan Dogra, Neil Boudville, Mary Pinder, Wai Lim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of nephrology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Acute Kidney Injury: Medical Causes and Pathogenesis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Association between Urinary Potassium Excretion and Acute Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Patients.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. The potential use of biomarkers in predicting contrast-induced acute kidney injury.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2016
    Review
  11. Outcomes After Post-Traumatic AKI Requiring RRT in United States Military Service Members.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2015
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kenneth YongDepartment of Renal Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia.
Gursharan Dogra
Neil Boudville
Mary Pinder
Wai Lim

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper addresses the epidemiology of AKI specifically in relation to recent changes in AKI classification and revisits the controversies regarding the timing of initiation of dialysis and the use of peritoneal dialysis as a renal replacement therapy for AKI. In summary, the new RIFLE/AKIN classifications of AKI have facilitated more uniform diagnosis of AKI and clinically significant risk stratification. Regardless, the issue of timing of dialysis initiation still remains unanswered and warrants further examination. Furthermore, peritoneal dialysis as a treatment modality for AKI remains underutilised in spite of potential beneficial effects. Future research should be directed at identifying early reliable biomarkers of AKI, which in conjunction with RIFLE/AKIN classifications of AKI could facilitate well-designed large randomised controlled trials of early versus late initiation of dialysis in AKI. In addition, further studies of peritoneal dialysis in AKI addressing dialysis dose and associated complications are required for this therapy to be accepted more widely by clinicians.

Identifiers

PMID21660314
PMCPMC3108161

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.