ArticleClinical kidney journal2024
Cost-effectiveness of screening for chronic kidney disease in the general adult population: a systematic review.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
46 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Recommendations of the Brazilian Society of Nephrology for the management of chronic kidney disease in primary health care.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaGuideline
- Article
- Emerging Urinary Biomarkers and Innovative Technologies for the Early Detection and Personalized Management of Chronic Kidney Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The epidemiology of end-stage kidney failure in France: reason for hope?Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
- Are your kidneys okay? Detect early to protect kidney health.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2026Article
- Medical costs in the peridiagnosis period of various biopsy-confirmed kidney diseases in South Korea.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2026Article
- 10 tips on performing economic evaluation in kidney disease.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- Increased albuminuria is highly prevalent in the general population: prevalence of CKD in the Gutenberg Health Study.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Article
- Article
- From albuminuria to multi-omics signatures: emerging biomarkers and drug targets for early-stage chronic kidney disease.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- A Pilot Study of Opportunistic Chronic Kidney Disease Screening in Primary Care Using a Clinical Decision Support System.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Diabetes and chronic kidney disease in Turkey (DIAKIT): a cross-sectional cohort study.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Are your kidneys ok? Detect early to protect kidney health.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Chronic kidney disease in Romania: national adjusted prevalence, risk factors, and temporal trends in high-risk groups.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Albuminuria as a diagnostic criterion and a therapeutic target in heart failure and other cardiovascular disease.European journal of heart failure · 2025Review
- "Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Chronic kidney disease in the primary care setting: A narrative review.Journal of general and family medicine · 2025Review
- Are your kidneys ok? Detect early to protect kidney health.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant public health problem, with rising incidence and prevalence worldwide, and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Early identification and treatment of CKD can slow its progression and prevent complications, but it is not clear whether CKD screening is cost-effective. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening strategies in general adult populations worldwide, and to identify factors, settings and drivers of cost-effectiveness in CKD screening. Methods: Studies examining the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening in the general adult population were identified by systematic literature search on electronic databases (MEDLINE OVID, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) for peer-reviewed publications, hand-searched reference lists and grey literature of relevant sites, focusing on the following themes: (i) CKD, (ii) screening and (iii) cost-effectiveness. Studies comprising health economic evaluations performed for CKD screening strategies, compared with no CKD screening or usual-care strategy in adult individuals, were included. Study characteristics, model assumptions and CKD screening strategies of selected studies were identified. The primary outcome of interest is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CKD screening, in cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and life-year gained (LYG), expressed in 2022 US dollars equivalent. Results: Twenty-one studies were identified, examining CKD screening in general and targeted populations. The cost-effectiveness of screening for CKD was found to vary widely across different studies, with ICERs ranging from $113 to $430 595, with a median of $26 662 per QALY and from $6516 to $38 372, with a median of $29 112 per LYG. Based on the pre-defined cost-effectiveness threshold of $50 000 per QALY, the majority of the studies found CKD screening to be cost-effective. CKD screening was especially cost-effective in those with diabetes ($113 to $42 359, with a median of $27 471 per QALY) and ethnic groups identified to be higher risk of CKD development or progression ($23 902 per QALY in African American adults and $21 285 per QALY in Canadian indigenous adults), as indicated by a lower ICER. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of CKD screening improved if it was performed in older adults, populations with higher CKD risk scores, or when setting a higher albuminuria detection threshold or increasing the interval between screening. In contrast, CKD screening was not cost-effective in populations without diabetes and hypertension (ICERs range from $117 769 to $1792 142, with a median of $202 761 per QALY). Treatment effectiveness, prevalence of CKD, cost of CKD treatment and discount rate were identified to be the most common influential drivers of the ICERs. Conclusions: Screening for CKD is especially cost-effective in patients with diabetes and high-risk ethnic groups, but not in populations without diabetes and hypertension. Increasing the age of screening, screening interval or albuminuria detection threshold, or selection of population based on CKD risk scores, may increase cost-effectiveness of CKD screening, while treatment effectiveness, prevalence of CKD, cost of CKD treatment and discount rate were influential drivers of the cost-effectiveness.
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.