ReviewPediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2013
Home haemodialysis.
Review in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Home hemodialysis technique survival: insights and challenges.BMC nephrology · 2023Review
- Safeguarding children and young people requiring kidney replacement therapy: challenges and potential opportunities.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2022Article
- Improved renal allograft survival for pre-emptive paediatric renal transplant recipients in the UK.Archives of disease in childhood · 2021Article
- Reducing the burden of cardiovascular disease in children with chronic kidney disease: prevention vs. damage limitation.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2021Review
- Possible Roles of Periostin in the Formation of Hemodialysis Vascular Access Stenosis after Polytetrafluoroethylene Graft Implantation in Dogs.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Haemodialysis (HD) began as an intensive care treatment offered to a very select number of patients in an attempt to keep them alive. Outcomes were extremely poor, and the procedure was cumbersome and labor intensive. With increasing expertise and advances in dialysis equipment, HD is now recognised as a life-sustaining treatment that is considered a standard of care for children with end stage renal disease (ESRD). Assessment of efficacy has evolved from mere survival, through achieving minimal standards of "adequate" dialysis with reduced morbidity, towards the provision of "optimal dialysis", which includes attempts to more closely mimic normal renal function, and of individualised care that maximizes the patient's health, psychosocial well-being and life potential. There is a renewed interest in dialysis, and the research profile has extended, exploring themes around convective versus diffusive treatments, HD time versus frequency and home versus in-centre dialysis. The results thus far have led dialysis care full circle from prolonged, home-based therapies to shorter, intense in-centre dialysis back to the belief that long or frequent HD at home achieves the best outcomes.
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.