Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37538810›Full record

ArticleKidney international reports2023

Impact of outcome adjudication in kidney disease trials: observations from the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP).

William G Herrington, Charlie Harper, Natalie Staplin, Richard Haynes, Jonathan Emberson, Christina Reith, Lai Seong Hooi, Adeera Levin, Christoph Wanner, Colin Baigent and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney international reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Heart failure events in randomized controlled trials for adults receiving maintenance dialysis: a meta-epidemiologic study.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

12 authors.

William G HerringtonMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
Charlie HarperMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
Natalie StaplinMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
Richard HaynesMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
Jonathan EmbersonMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
Christina ReithMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
Lai Seong HooiHospital Sultanah Aminah, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
Adeera LevinUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Christoph WannerUniversity Clinic of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Colin BaigentMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
Martin LandrayMedical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), University of Oxford, UK.
SHARP Collaborative Group

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L004933/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: We aimed to assess opportunities for trial streamlining and the scientific impact of adjudication on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in CKD. Methods: We analysed the effects of adjudication of ~2100 maintenance kidney replacement therapy (KRT) and ~1300 major atherosclerotic events (MAEs) recorded in SHARP. We first compared outcome classification before versus after adjudication, and then re-ran randomised comparisons using pre-adjudicated follow-up data. Results: For maintenance KRT, adjudication had little impact with only 1% of events being refuted (28/2115). Consequently, randomised comparisons using pre-adjudication reports found almost identical results (pre-adjudication: simvastatin/ezetimibe 1038 vs placebo 1077; risk ratio [RR] 0.95, 95%CI 0.88-1.04; post-adjudicated: 1057 vs 1084; RR=0.97, 95%CI 0.89-1.05). For MAEs, about one-quarter of patient reports were refuted (324/1275 [25%]), and reviewing 3538 other potential vascular events and death reports identified only 194 additional MAEs. Nevertheless, randomised analyses using SHARP's pre-adjudicated data alone found similar results to analyses based on adjudicated outcomes (pre-adjudication: 573 vs 702; RR=0.80, 95%CI 0.72-0.89; adjudicated: 526 vs 619; RR=0.83, 95%CI 0.74- 0.94), and also suggested refuted MAEs were likely to represent atherosclerotic disease (RR for refuted MAEs=0.80, 95%CI 0.65-1.00). Conclusions: These analyses provide three key insights. First, they provide a rationale for nephrology trials not to adjudicate maintenance KRT. Secondly, when an event that mimics an atherosclerotic outcome is not expected to be influenced by the treatment under study (e.g. heart failure), the aim of adjudicating atherosclerotic outcomes should be to remove such events. Lastly, restrictive definitions for the remaining suspected atherosclerotic outcomes may reduce statistical power.

Indexed as

adjudicationchronic kidney diseaseclinical trialsdialysistransplantation

Identifiers

PMID37538810
PMCPMC7614871

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.