Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31951618›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

A systematic review and meta-analysis of acute kidney injury in the intensive care units of developed and developing countries.

Fernando de Assis Ferreira Melo, Etienne Macedo, Ana Caroline Fonseca Bezerra, Walédya Araújo Lopes de Melo, Ravindra L Mehta, Emmanuel de Almeida Burdmann, Dirce Maria Trevisan Zanetta

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Nanoselenium attenuates renal ischemia-reperfusion injury in rats.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Fernando de Assis Ferreira MeloDivision of Urology, Acre Federal University, Rio Branco, Acre, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4450-2550
Etienne MacedoDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, California, United States of America.
Ana Caroline Fonseca BezerraDivision of Urology, Acre Federal University, Rio Branco, Acre, Brazil.
Walédya Araújo Lopes de MeloDivision of Urology, Acre Federal University, Rio Branco, Acre, Brazil.
Ravindra L MehtaDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, California, United States of America.
Emmanuel de Almeida BurdmannLIM 12, Division of Nephrology, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Dirce Maria Trevisan ZanettaDepartment of Epidemiology, University of São Paulo School of Public Health, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Acre · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversity of California San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAlthough the majority of the global population lives in developing countries, most of the epidemiological data related to intensive care unit (ICU) acute kidney injury (AKI) comes from developed countries. This systematic review aims to ascertain the methodology of studies on ICU AKI patients in developing and developed countries, to determine whether epidemiological comparisons between these two settings are possible, and to present a summary estimate of AKI incidence.

methodsA systematic review of published studies reporting AKI in intensive care units (2005-2015) identified in PubMed, LILACS, and IBECs databases was conducted. We compared developed and developing countries by evaluating study methodology, AKI reference serum creatinine definitions, population characteristics, AKI incidence and mortality. AKI incidence was calculated with a random-effects model.

resultsNinety-two studies were included, one of which reported data from both country categories: 60 from developed countries (1,057,332 patients) and 33 from developing countries (34,539 patients). In 78% of the studies, AKI was defined by the RIFLE, AKIN or KDIGO criteria. Oliguria had 11 different definitions and reference creatinine 23 different values. For the meta-analysis, 38 studies from developed and 18 from developing countries were selected, with similar AKI incidence: 39.3% and 35.1%, respectively. The need for dialysis, length of ICU stay and mortality were higher in developing countries.

conclusionAlthough patient characteristics and AKI incidence were similar in developed and developing countries, main outcomes were worse in developing country studies. There are significant caveats when comparing AKI epidemiology in developed and developing countries, including lack of standardization of reference serum creatinine, oliguria and the timeframe for AKI assessment. Larger, prospective, multicenter studies from developing countries are urgently needed to capture AKI data from the overall population without ICU access.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryDeveloped CountriesDeveloping CountriesHumansIncidenceIntensive Care Units

Identifiers

PMID31951618
PMCPMC6968869
OpenAlexW2999710344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.