Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26188736›Full record

ReviewCurrent diabetes reports2015

Update on Estimation of Kidney Function in Diabetic Kidney Disease.

Petter Bjornstad, David Z Cherney, David M Maahs

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current diabetes reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Disparities in Hemoglobin ADiabetes care · 2021
    Article
  15. Current updates on protein as biomarkers for diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Estimated GFR: time for a critical appraisal.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2019
    Review
  20. Observational
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

3 authors.

Petter BjornstadDepartment of Pediatric Endocrinology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA, petter.bjornstad@childrenscolorado.org.
David Z Cherney
David M Maahs

Funding

Training Program in Diabetes ResearchT32DK063687 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Andrea Steck · 2002 to 2026
$5.2M
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK063687
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The American Diabetes Association recommends annual assessment of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) to screen for diabetic nephropathy. GFR is measured indirectly using markers that, ideally, are eliminated only by glomerular filtration. Measured GFR, although the gold standard, remains cumbersome and expensive. GFR is therefore routinely estimated using creatinine and/or cystatin C and clinical variables. In pediatrics, the Schwartz creatinine-based equation is most frequently used even though combined creatinine and cystatin C-based equations demonstrate stronger agreement with measured GFR. In adults, the CKD Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations with creatinine and/or cystatin C are the most accurate and precise estimating equations. Despite recent advances, current estimates of GFR lack precision and accuracy before chronic kidney disease stage 3 (GFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). There is therefore an urgent need to improve the methods for estimating and measuring GFR. In this review, we examine the current literature and data addressing measurement and estimation of GFR in diabetes.

Indexed as

BiomarkersCreatinineCystatin CDiabetic NephropathiesGlomerular Filtration RateHumansKidneyBiomarkersCreatinineCystatin C

Identifiers

PMID26188736
PMCPMC6429956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.