ReviewFrontiers in pediatrics2020
Does Your Program Know Its AKI and CRRT Epidemiology? The Case for a Dashboard.
Review in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fluid accumulation and outcomes in children receiving continuous kidney replacement therapy: an appraisal of the WE-ROCK registry.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Program of quality improvement for extracorporeal blood purification therapies in the intensive care unit.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Review
- Kidney support for babies: building a comprehensive and integrated neonatal kidney support therapy program.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2023Review
- Consensus-Based Recommendations on Priority Activities to Address Acute Kidney Injury in Children: A Modified Delphi Consensus Statement.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Development, implementation and outcomes of a quality assurance system for the provision of continuous renal replacement therapy in the intensive care unit.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current acute kidney injury (AKI) literature focuses on diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. While little literature exists studying the quality of care delivered to patients with AKI. However, improving outcomes for patients is dependent on the specifics of the delivered care (i.e., the who, what, when, and how). Therefore, it is necessary to direct attention to process measures to assess the relationship between care and outcomes. The application of quality improvement science to the care of AKI, uses a series of metrics encompassing both processes and outcomes to better understand, evaluate, and ensure the delivery high quality care.
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.