ArticleBMJ open2020
Shared decision-making in advanced kidney disease: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Recommendations of high-quality clinical practice guidelines related to the process of starting dialysis: A systematic review.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Shared Decision-Making in Dialysis Modality Selection Among Adults with Advanced Kidney Disease in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- End-of-life care planning for ethnically diverse kidney patients in the COVID-19 era.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
- Shared decision making and dialysis choice: an observational longitudinal cohort study.BMC nephrology · 2025Observational
- Dialysis in the Elderly: A Practical Guide for the Clinician.International journal of nephrology · 2025Review
- Nephrology providers' perspective and use of mortality prognostic tools in dialysis patients.BMC nephrology · 2024Article
- Participation in eHealth Communication Interventions Among Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Shared decision-making in end-of-life care for end-stage renal disease patients: nephrologists' views and attitudes.Israel journal of health policy research · 2024Article
- Views, attitudes, and reported practices of nephrology nurses regarding shared decision-making in end-of-life care.Nursing ethics · 2024Article
- Article
- Interventions, Participative Role, Barriers, and Facilitators for Involvement in eHealth Communication for People Undergoing Hemodialysis: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Development of an online patient decision aid for kidney failure treatment modality decisions.BMC nephrology · 2022Article
- Global evidence on the rapid adoption of telemedicine in primary care during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
- 'It's the empathy'-defining a role for peer support among people living with chronic kidney disease: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Supporting Shared Decision-Making and Home Dialysis in End-Stage Kidney Disease.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2022Article
- Time to press the reset button-can we use the COVID-19 pandemic to rethink the process of transplant assessment?Clinical kidney journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatients with advanced kidney disease (AKD) have to make difficult treatment modality decisions as their disease progresses towards end-stage kidney disease. International guidelines in nephrology suggest shared decision-making (SDM) to help patients make timely treatment modality decisions that align with their values and preferences. However, systematic reviews or scoping reviews on these SDM interventions and on their reported use or outcomes are lacking. This limits the adoption of SDM in clinical practice and hampers further research and development on the subject. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of these SDM interventions by means of a scoping review of the literature. Scoping reviews can provide a broad overview of a topic, identify gaps in the research knowledge base and report on the types of evidence that address and inform practices. This paper presents our study protocol. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The proposed scoping review will be performed in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews. It will cover both qualitative and quantitative scientific literature, as well as the grey literature on SDM interventions for treatment modality decisions in AKD. Only literature written in English will be considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers will participate in an iterative process of screening the literature, paper selection and data extraction. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion until consensus is reached or after consultation with the research team when needed. Results will be reported with descriptive statistics and diagrammatic or tabular displayed information, accompanied by narrative summaries as explained in the JBI guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the conduct of this study is not required. We will analyse previously collected data for the proposed scoping review. Our results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated through conferences and/or seminars.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.