ArticleNature reviews. Nephrology2020
Innovations in dialysis membranes for improved kidney replacement therapy.
Article in Nature reviews. Nephrology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Human-Centered Care to Address Contemporary Unmet Needs in Chronic Dialysis.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2024Review
- Portable, wearable and implantable artificial kidney systems: needs, opportunities and challenges.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2023Review
- Review
- Classification of Uremic Toxins and Their Role in Kidney Failure.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2021Review
- Uraemic solutes as therapeutic targets in CKD-associated cardiovascular disease.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2021Review
- The current and future landscape of dialysis.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2020Review
- The future of the artificial kidney.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaReview
- Disruptive technologies for hemodialysis: medium and high cutoff membranes. Is the future now?Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32322085What 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.