Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36339429›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2022

A systematic review and meta-analysis of gut microbiota in diabetic kidney disease: Comparisons with diabetes mellitus, non-diabetic kidney disease, and healthy individuals.

Shisheng Han, Min Chen, Pei Cheng, Zeng Zhang, Yan Lu, Yanqiu Xu, Yi Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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.

Shisheng HanDepartment of Nephrology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Min ChenDepartment of Nephrology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Pei ChengDepartment of Hemodialysis, Lin'an Third People's Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Zeng ZhangDepartment of Endocrine, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yan LuDepartment of Nephrology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yanqiu XuDepartment of Nephrology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yi WangDepartment of Nephrology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNYueyang Hospital · CNThird People's Hospital of Hangzhou · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Gut microbiota has been reported to play an important role in diabetic kidney disease (DKD), however, the alterations of gut bacteria have not been determined. Methods: Studies comparing the differences of gut microbiome between patients with DKD and non-DKD individuals using high-throughput sequencing technology, were systematically searched and reviewed. Outcomes were set as gut bacterial diversity, microbial composition, and correlation with clinical parameters of DKD. Qualitative data were summarized and compared through a funnel R script, and quantitative data were estimated by meta-analysis. Results: A total of 15 studies and 1640 participants were included, the comparisons were conducted between DKD, diabetes mellitus (DM), non-diabetic kidney disease (NDKD), and healthy controls. There were no significant differences of α-diversity between DKD and DM, and between DKD and NDKD, however, significant lower microbial richness was found in DKD compared to healthy controls. Different bacterial compositions were found between DKD and non-DKD subjects. The phylum Conclusions: Gut bacterial alterations was demonstrated in DKD, characterized by the enrichment of the genera Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022340870.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic NephropathiesGastrointestinal MicrobiomeBacteriaGlomerular Filtration RateHealth StatusHumansdiabetes mellitusdiabetic kidney diseasegut microbiotameta-analysissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36339429
PMCPMC9633273
OpenAlexW4306939794

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.