Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26885659›Full record

ReviewJournal of nephrology2016

Nonadherence to immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients: can technology help?

Erika Nerini, Fulvio Bruno, Franco Citterio, Francesco P Schena

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of nephrology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Urinary Excretion ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Erika NeriniFBCommunication, Modena, Italy.
Fulvio BrunoFBCommunication, Modena, Italy.
Franco CitterioTransplantation Unit, Department of Surgery, Università Cattolica, Rome, Italy.
Francesco P SchenaRegional Centre of Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Policlinico, Piazza G. Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy. paolo.schena@uniba.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

End-stage kidney disease is a life-threatening condition that compels patients to accept either dialysis or transplant. Kidney transplantation is the best choice for patients with end-stage kidney disease because it ensures higher quality of life and longer survival rates than other choices, with less cost for the healthcare system. However, in order for renal recipients to maintain the functioning graft they must take lifelong immunosuppressive medications, with possible side effects and low medication adherence. It is known that low medication adherence in kidney transplant recipients may cause poor outcomes, chronic graft rejection, and graft failure. In this review, the authors give an overview of nonadherence in the transplant setting. In addition, they analyze the role of different technologies as an aid to improve adherence, with a focus on mobile-phone based solutions to monitor and enhance kidney transplant recipient compliance.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeMedication AdherenceMobile ApplicationsGraft RejectionGraft SurvivalHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsKidney Failure, ChronicKidney TransplantationPatient Education as TopicReminder SystemsRisk FactorsTelemedicineTransplant RecipientsTreatment OutcomeImmunosuppressive AgentsImmunosuppressive therapyInteractive voice response systemKidney transplantationNonadherence

Identifiers

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.