Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29081996›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2017

Chronic kidney disease in low-income to middle-income countries: the case for increased screening.

Cindy George, Amelie Mogueo, Ikechi Okpechi, Justin B Echouffo-Tcheugui, Andre Pascal Kengne

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 117 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
117citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

117 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. CKD in Indigenous Populations in Kerala, India.Kidney international reports · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. Article

57 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Cindy GeorgeNon-Communicable Disease Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Parow, Cape Town, South Africa.
Amelie MogueoDepartment of Management, Assessment and Health Policy, School of Public Health, The University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada.
Ikechi OkpechiDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Groote Schuur Hospital and University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Justin B Echouffo-TcheuguiDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Andre Pascal KengneNon-Communicable Disease Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Parow, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is fast becoming a major public health issue, disproportionately burdening low-income to middle-income countries, where detection rates remain low. We critically assessed the extant literature on CKD screening in low-income to middle-income countries. We performed a PubMed search, up to September 2016, for studies on CKD screening in low-income to middle-income countries. Relevant studies were summarised through key questions derived from the Wilson and Jungner criteria. We found that low-income to middle-income countries are ill-equipped to deal with the devastating consequences of CKD, particularly the late stages of the disease. There are acceptable and relatively simple tools that can aid CKD screening in these countries. Screening should primarily include high-risk individuals (those with hypertension, type 2 diabetes, HIV infection or aged >60 years), but also extend to those with suboptimal levels of risk (eg, prediabetes and prehypertension). Since screening for hypertension, type 2 diabetes and HIV infection is already included in clinical practice guidelines in resource-poor settings, it is conceivable to couple this with simple CKD screening tests. Effective implementation of CKD screening remains a challenge, and the cost-effectiveness of such an undertaking largely remains to be explored. In conclusion, for many compelling reasons, screening for CKD should be a policy priority in low-income to middle-income countries, as early intervention is likely to be effective in reducing the high burden of morbidity and mortality from CKD. This will help health systems to achieve cost-effective prevention.

Indexed as

chronic kidney diseasedeveloping countriesscreening

Identifiers

PMID29081996
PMCPMC5584488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.