ReviewNature reviews. Nephrology2015
Nephrology research--the past, present and future.
Review in Nature reviews. Nephrology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidelines for clinical evaluation of chronic kidney disease : AMED research on regulatory science of pharmaceuticals and medical devices.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2018Guideline
- Iranian Chronic Kidney Disease Biobank as a comprehensive resource for next-generation research: study design and protocol.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Big Data in Nephrology.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2021Review
- From Severe Herpes Zoster to Rare Suid Herpesvirus Encephalitis: A New Twist of theInternational journal of medical sciences · 2020Review
- Proposed minimum information guideline for kidney disease-research and clinical data reporting: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Diagnostic Utility of Exome Sequencing for Kidney Disease.The New England journal of medicine · 2019Article
- Nocardiosis in Kidney Disease Patients under Immunosuppressive Therapy: Case Report and Literature Review.International journal of medical sciences · 2019Review
- Global nephrology workforce: gaps and opportunities toward a sustainable kidney care system.Kidney international supplements · 2018Review
- The biobank for the molecular classification of kidney disease: research translation and precision medicine in nephrology.BMC nephrology · 2017Article
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 at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Important advances have been made in basic and clinical nephrology research over the past decade, with improved pathological insights into various disease processes and the introduction of new treatments for diseases such as atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome. However, many challenges remain. In this Viewpoint, we asked five Nature Reviews Nephrology Advisory Board members, who have been associated with the journal since its launch in November 2005, to reflect on the progress and roadblocks of the past 10 years. They also comment on areas where effort and money should be invested and how they expect the field to progress in the next 10 years.
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.