Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31321065›Full record

ReviewCanadian journal of kidney health and disease2019

Survival Comparisons of Home Dialysis Versus In-Center Hemodialysis: A Narrative Review.

Amanda J Vinson, Jeffrey Perl, Karthik K Tennankore

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Canadian journal of kidney health and disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06274710 (Open Access Digital CommunitY Promoting Self-Care, Peer Support, and HEalth LitEracy), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT06274710 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Open Access Digital CommunitY Promoting Self-Care, Peer Support, and HEalth LitEracy (ODYSSEE) for Kidney Health (KH) Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Health Network, TorontoRan2023 to 2026Enrolled344ConditionsChronic Kidney DiseasesArmsODYSSEE-KH
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Home dialysis therapies.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Assessing the efficacy of coproduction to better understand the barriers to achieving sustainability in NHS chronic kidney services and create alternate pathways.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. [Digital nephrology].Der nephrologe · 2021
    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

3 authors.

Amanda J VinsonDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, Canada.
Jeffrey PerlDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, ON, Canada.
Karthik K TennankoreDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewMany observational studies have demonstrated a survival benefit with home dialysis compared with in-center dialysis; however, results have been conflicting. The purpose of this review was to identify pitfalls and limitations in existing literature and examine the challenges of studying home and in-center dialysis populations. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: Original research articles were identified from MEDLINE using search terms "in-center hemodialysis," "home hemodialysis," "conventional hemodialysis," "nocturnal hemodialysis," and "short daily hemodialysis."

methodsA focused review and critical appraisal of existing home versus in-center hemodialysis survival literature was conducted to identify potential causes for variability in the observed survival outcomes. KEY

findingsThe controversy in existing literature stems from the challenges of randomizing patients to home versus in-center hemodialysis modalities, and therefore a reliance on observational comparisons for study. In many cases, these observational analyses have been limited by selection bias (variabilities in populations included, inclusion of both incident and prevalent cohorts, and variabilities in dialysis intensity), as well as residual confounding. Furthermore, the studies that do exist lack generalizability in many cases. LIMITATIONS: There are few randomized controlled trials examining the survival benefit of home versus in-center hemodialysis and existing observational studies are often limited by bias and reduced generalizability. These limitations comprise the body of this review. IMPLICATIONS: This review examines challenges surrounding survival comparisons with home versus in-center hemodialysis and identify important directions for future study.

Indexed as

hemodialysishome dialysisin-center dialysisreviewsurvival

Identifiers

PMID31321065
PMCPMC6628511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.