ArticleClinical kidney journal2021
The arteriovenous access stage (AVAS) classification.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2021. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning validation of the AVAS classification compared to ultrasound mapping in a multicentre study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Validation of arteriovenous access stage (AVAS) classification: a prospective, international multicentre study.Clinical kidney journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKey anatomical factors mean that individuals needing arteriovenous access are unique and have different possibilities for fistula creation. The aim of this article is to describe a new classification system for all patients needing haemodialysis vascular access in the upper extremity with the purpose to simplify sharing the information about suitability for surgical access creation depending on vascular anatomy.
methodsAccording to the patient's vascular anatomy in right and left superior extremities, patients were separated into three arteriovenous access stages (AVAS). The AVAS was validated by three blinded observers using a sample of 70 upper limb arteriovenous maps that were performed using ultrasound on patients referred for vascular access assessment. A sample size calculation was performed and calculated that for three observers, a minimum of 67 maps were required to confirm significant agreement at a Kappa value of 0.9 (95% confidence interval 0.75-0.99).
resultsThe Kappa value for inter-rater reliability using Fleiss' Kappa coefficient was 0.94 and all patients fitted into the AVAS classification system.
conclusionThe AVAS classification system is a simplified way to share information about vascular access options based on a patient's vascular anatomy with high inter-rater reliability.
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.