ArticleKidney medicine
Physicians' Recognition and Management of Kidney Disease: A Randomized Vignette Study Evaluating the Impact of the KDIGO 2012 CKD Classification System.
Article in Kidney medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic kidney disease recognition amongst physicians and advanced practice providers.Renal failure · 2021Article
- Combined Albuminuria and Estimated GFR Laboratory Reporting Affects Primary Care Management of CKD.Kidney medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RATIONALE &
objectiveThe Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (KDOQI) and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) chronic kidney disease (CKD) classification systems published in 2002 and 2012, respectively, are recommended worldwide and based on strong epidemiologic data. However, their impact on CKD recognition and management is not well evaluated in clinical practice, and we therefore investigated whether they help physicians recognize and appropriately care for patients with CKD. STUDY
designRandomized vignette experiment with fractional factorial design based on 6 kidney-related scenarios and 3 laboratory presentation methods reflecting the CKD guidelines. Participants evaluated 1 of 3 subsets of the 18 vignettes (ie, 6 vignettes each with 4 answer alternatives). SETTING &
participants249 interns, general practitioners, and residents/fellows attending postgraduate meetings and courses in Norway and the United States.
interventionKidney-related results (serum creatinine level and urinary albumin excretion) were presented as the "minimal data" (high/low levels), KDOQI-2002 (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] reported automatically), or KDIGO-2012 (eGFR + albuminuria categorization + risk for complications) laboratory report. OUTCOME: CKD management choice by physicians.
resultsWhen kidney laboratory data were presented as the KDOQI-2002 report (automatic eGFR calculation), there was a significantly higher odds for correct patient management decisions compared with the minimal data report (OR, 1.57; LIMITATIONS: Physicians' management was evaluated by theoretical scenarios rather than direct patient care.
conclusionsAutomatic GFR estimation, albuminuria categorization, and notification of the associated risk for complications improve most physicians` recognition and management of a wide range of CKD clinical scenarios.
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.