Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32596403›Full record

ReviewBioMed research international2020

Using Artificial Intelligence Resources in Dialysis and Kidney Transplant Patients: A Literature Review.

Alexandru Burlacu, Adrian Iftene, Daniel Jugrin, Iolanda Valentina Popa, Paula Madalina Lupu, Cristiana Vlad, Adrian Covic

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Effect of Remote and Virtual Technology on Home Dialysis.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alexandru BurlacuDepartment of Interventional Cardiology-Cardiovascular Diseases Institute, Iasi, Romania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3424-1588
Adrian IfteneFaculty of Computer Science, "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University of Iasi, Romania.
Daniel JugrinCenter for Studies and Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, University of Bucharest, Romania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0280-9279
Iolanda Valentina Popa"Grigore T. Popa" University of Medicine, Iasi, Romania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0597-8839
Paula Madalina Lupu"Grigore T. Popa" University of Medicine, Iasi, Romania.
Cristiana Vlad"Grigore T. Popa" University of Medicine, Iasi, Romania.
Adrian Covic"Grigore T. Popa" University of Medicine, Iasi, Romania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9985-2486
Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and Pharmacy · ROAlexandru Ioan Cuza University · ROUniversity of Bucharest · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this review is to depict current research and impact of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) algorithms on dialysis and kidney transplantation. Published studies were presented from two points of view: What medical aspects were covered? What AI/ML algorithms have been used?

methodsWe searched four electronic databases or studies that used AI/ML in hemodialysis (HD), peritoneal dialysis (PD), and kidney transplantation (KT). Sixty-nine studies were split into three categories: AI/ML and HD, PD, and KT, respectively. We identified 43 trials in the first group, 8 in the second, and 18 in the third. Then, studies were classified according to the type of algorithm.

resultsAI and HD trials covered: (a) dialysis service management, (b) dialysis procedure, (c) anemia management, (d) hormonal/dietary issues, and (e) arteriovenous fistula assessment. PD studies were divided into (a) peritoneal technique issues, (b) infections, and (c) cardiovascular event prediction. AI in transplantation studies were allocated into (a) management systems (ML used as pretransplant organ-matching tools), (b) predicting graft rejection, (c) tacrolimus therapy modulation, and (d) dietary issues.

conclusionsAlthough guidelines are reluctant to recommend AI implementation in daily practice, there is plenty of evidence that AI/ML algorithms can predict better than nephrologists: volumes, Kt/V, and hypotension or cardiovascular events during dialysis. Altogether, these trials report a robust impact of AI/ML on quality of life and survival in G5D/T patients. In the coming years, one would probably witness the emergence of AI/ML devices that facilitate the management of dialysis patients, thus increasing the quality of life and survival.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDecision Making, Computer-AssistedKidney Failure, ChronicKidney TransplantationRenal DialysisAlgorithmsGraft RejectionHumansModels, StatisticalQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID32596403
PMCPMC7303737
OpenAlexW3035139546

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.