Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36719883›Full record

ReviewPloS one2023

An integrative literature review of kidney transplantation knowledge tools.

Chan Mi Kang, Hyejin Lee

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chan Mi KangDepartment of Nursing, Dong-Eui Institute of Technology, Busan, South Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5485-355X
Hyejin LeeDepartment of Nursing, Dong-Eui University, Busan, South Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5158-7556
Dong-Eui University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to identify knowledge measurement tools for kidney transplantation (KT) and confirm their assessment methods, domains, and validity to provide useful information.

designAn integrative review based on Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.

methodsAn integrative search was conducted using four English databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library) and the top three Korean databases (RISS, DBpia, and KISS). Search terms and strategies included ("kidney transplant*" OR "renal transplant*" OR "kidney replace*" OR "renal replace*" OR "kidney graft" OR "renal graft") & (knowledge OR awareness) & (scale OR tool OR instrument OR questionnaire OR inventory). The time limit was set to February 2022. The extracted data included the content of the tools, participants, and psychometrics. Quality of life was assessed using a psychometric grading framework.

resultsA total of 15 studies and 13 tools were reviewed. Of these, seven studies (46.7%) targeted KT patients, five (33.3%) targeted KT candidates, and three (20.0%) included both groups. The number of items in the tools ranged from five to 33 items. Furthermore, seven tools comprised true-false questions and eight multiple-choice questions. The domains of the KT knowledge measurement tool used in each study differed across study participants. Both reliability and validity were confirmed in six tools, and only two showed a grade of "adequate" or higher.

conclusionA validated tool is required to measure KT knowledge. These tools can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions in promoting self-management after KT. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022334559.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationHumansPsychometricsQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36719883
PMCPMC9888680
OpenAlexW4318667567

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.