ArticleJournal of nephrology2017
Incremental start to PD as experienced in Italy: results of censuses carried out from 2005 to 2014.
Article in Journal of nephrology, 2017. 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.
- Association of incident dialysis modality with patient survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC nephrology · 2025Pooled it
- The feasibility of incremental peritoneal dialysis for older patients on peritoneal dialysis.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2026Article
- Incremental peritoneal dialysis and survival outcomes: a propensity-matched cohort study.Journal of nephrology · 2023Article
- Incremental Versus Standard (Full-Dose) Peritoneal Dialysis.Kidney international reports · 2022Review
- Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: Patient Perspectives and Outcomes.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2021Review
- Comparison of sodium removal in peritoneal dialysis patients treated by continuous ambulatory and automated peritoneal dialysis.Journal of nephrology · 2019Article
- Incremental hemodialysis, a valuable option for the frail elderly patient.Journal of nephrology · 2019Review
- IHDIP: a controlled randomized trial to assess the security and effectiveness of the incremental hemodialysis in incident patients.BMC nephrology · 2019Article
- Nutritional treatment of advanced CKD: twenty consensus statements.Journal of nephrology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is not known how widely used in Italy an incremental start to in peritoneal dialysis (Incr-PD) is.
methodsBy analyzing the peritoneal dialysis (PD) censuses conducted by the PD Study Group (GSDP-SIN) for the years 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2014 in all the Centers performing PD in Italy, the use of Incr-PD, i.e. continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) with 1 or 2 exchanges/day or automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) with 3-4 sessions/week, was examined among incident PD patients.
resultsIn 2014 PD was started in Italy by 1,652 patients, 455 (27.5%) of whom incrementally (Incr-CAPD 82.2% vs. Incr-APD 17.8%). Incr-PD was used in 53.5% of the 225 Centers. The number of patients and of Centers using Incr-DP increased constantly over the years up to 2012 (in 2005 Incr-PD was used in 33.4% of Centers, and in 11.9% of patients). The use of Incr-PD was greater in Centers with a more extensive PD program and greater use of PD in general. The most widely-used modality in Incr-PD was CAPD.
conclusionsIncr-PD is used in Italy in a large number of incident PD patients. The reasons for this increase need to be clarified, as current adequacy targets are based on full-dose studies with a very low glomerular filtration rate (GFR).
Indexed as
Identifiers
28500518What 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.