ArticleCanadian journal of kidney health and disease2020
A Mixed Method Investigation to Determine Priorities for Improving Information, Interaction, and Individualization of Care Among Individuals on In-center Hemodialysis: The Triple I Study.
Article in Canadian journal of kidney health and disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characteristics, Attitudes and Preferences of an End-Stage Kidney Disease Population at the Beginning of an Exercise Program: A Pragmatic Multicenter Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A Qualitative Study Describing the Perspectives on Frailty and Its Management in Individuals with Kidney Failure.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2025Article
- Systematic Review of Patient and Caregiver Involvement in CKD Research.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Patient, Caregiver, and Provider Perspectives on Improving Provider-Patient Interactions in Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2025Article
- Developing and Tailoring a Person-Centred Pathway for Mental Health Care for People Receiving Dialysis.Nephron · 2025Review
- Mental Health Care for Adults Treated With Dialysis in Canada: A Scoping Review.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2022Article
- How Are Albertans "Adjusting to and Coping With" Dialysis? A Cross-Sectional Survey.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2022Article
- Voicing Individual Concerns for Engagement in Hemodialysis (VOICE-HD): A Mixed Method, Randomized Pilot Trial of Digital Health in Dialysis Care Delivery.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2021Article
- Patient, Caregiver, and Provider Perspectives on Improving Information Delivery in Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2021Article
- Patient, Caregiver, and Provider Perspectives on Challenges and Solutions to Individualization of Care in Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 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
21 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent health systems do not effectively address all aspects of chronic care. For better self-management of disease, kidney patients have identified the need for improved health care information, interaction with health care providers, and individualization of care.
objectiveThe Triple I study examined challenges to exchange of
designWe employed a sequential mixed methods approach with 3 phases:1. A qualitative study with focus groups and interviews (Apr 2017 to Aug 2018);2. A cross-sectional national ranking survey (Jan 2019 to May 2019);3. A prioritization workshop using a modified James Lind Alliance process (June 2019).
settingIn-center hemodialysis units in 7 academic centers across Canada: Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Montreal, and Halifax.
participantsIndividuals receiving in-center hemodialysis, their caregivers, and health care providers working in in-center hemodialysis participated in each of the 3 phases.
methodsIn Phase 1, we collected qualitative data through (1) focus groups and interviews with hemodialysis patients and their caregivers and (2) individual interviews with health care providers and decision makers. Participants identified challenges to in-center hemodialysis care and potential solutions to these challenges. In Phase 2, we administered a pan-Canadian cross-sectional ranking survey. The survey asked respondents to prioritize the challenges to in-center hemodialysis care identified in Phase 1 by ranking their top 5 topics/challenges in each of the 3 "I" categories. In Phase 3, we undertook a face-to-face priority setting workshop which followed a modified version of the James Lind Alliance priority setting workshop process. The workshop employed an iterative process incorporating small and large group sessions during which participants identified, ranked, and voted on the top challenges and innovations to hemodialysis care. Four patient partners contributed to study design, implementation, analysis, and interpretation.
resultsAcross the 5 participating centers, we conducted 8 focus groups and 44 interviews, in which 113 participants identified 45 distinct challenges to in-center hemodialysis care. Subsequently, completion of a national ranking survey (n = 323) of these challenges resulted in a short-list of the top 30 challenges. Finally, using small and large group sessions to develop consensus during the prioritizing workshop, 38 stakeholders used this short-list to identify the top 10 challenges to in-center hemodialysis care. These included individualization of dialysis-related education; improved information in specific topic areas (transplant status, dialysis modalities, dialysis-related complications, and other health risks); more flexibility in hemodialysis scheduling; better communication and continuity of care within the health care team; and increased availability of transportation, financial, and social support programs. LIMITATIONS: Participants were from urban centers and were predominately English-speaking. Survey response rate of 31.5% in Phase 2 may have led to selection bias. We collected limited information on social determinants of health, which could confound our results.
conclusionOverall, the challenges we identified demonstrate that individualized care and information that improves interaction with health care providers is important to patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. In future stages of this project, we will aim to address these challenges by trialing innovative patient-centered solutions.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.