Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28340135›Full record

ReviewNephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association2017

Modeling longitudinal data and its impact on survival in observational nephrology studies: tools and considerations.

Elani Streja, Leanne Goldstein, Melissa Soohoo, Yoshitsugu Obi, Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, Connie M Rhee

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Statistical consideration in nephrology research.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elani StrejaHarold Simmons Center for Chronic Disease Research and Epidemiology, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Leanne GoldsteinDivision of Biostatistics, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
Melissa SoohooHarold Simmons Center for Chronic Disease Research and Epidemiology, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Yoshitsugu ObiHarold Simmons Center for Chronic Disease Research and Epidemiology, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Kamyar Kalantar-ZadehHarold Simmons Center for Chronic Disease Research and Epidemiology, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Connie M RheeHarold Simmons Center for Chronic Disease Research and Epidemiology, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California Irvine School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, USA.
University of California, Irvine · USVA Long Beach Healthcare System · USCity Of Hope National Medical Center · US

Funding

MALNUTRITION, DIET AND RACIAL DISPARITIES IN CKDK24DK091419 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI KALANTAR-ZADEH, KAMYAR · 2011 to 2020
$1.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK091419
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nephrologists and kidney disease researchers are often interested in monitoring how patients' clinical and laboratory measures change over time, what factors may impact these changes, and how these changes may lead to differences in morbidity, mortality, and other outcomes. When longitudinal data with repeated measures over time in the same patients are available, there are a number of analytical approaches that could be employed to describe the trends and changes in these measures, and to explore the associations of these changes with outcomes. Researchers may choose a streamlined and simplified analytic approach to examine trajectories with subsequent outcomes such as estimating deltas (subtraction of the last observation from the first observation) or estimating per patient slopes with linear regression. Conversely, they could more fully address the data complexity by using a longitudinal mixed model to estimate change as a predictor or employ a joint model, which can simultaneously model the longitudinal effect and its impact on an outcome such as survival. In this review, we aim to assist nephrologists and clinical researchers by reviewing these approaches in modeling the association of longitudinal change in a marker with outcomes, while appropriately considering the data complexity. Namely, we will discuss the use of simplified approaches for creating predictor variables representing change in measurements including deltas and patient slopes, as well more sophisticated longitudinal models including joint models, which can be used in addition to simplified models based on the indications and objectives of the study as warranted.

Indexed as

HumansKidney DiseasesLinear ModelsLongitudinal StudiesMorbidityNephrologyObservational Studies as TopicResearch Designchange analysisjoint modelslongitudinalmixed-effects modelsrepeated measures

Identifiers

PMID28340135
PMCPMC6251642
OpenAlexW2599749275

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.