Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38344718›Full record

ArticleKidney international reports2024

Impact of Remote Monitoring on Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Peritoneal Dialysis.

Francisco Javier Centellas-Pérez, Agustín Ortega-Cerrato, Manel Vera, Ramón Jesús Devesa-Buch, Eduardo Muñoz-de-Bustillo, Mercedes Prats, Rafael Alonso-Valente, José Pedro Morais, Paula Jaro Cara-Espada, Claudia Yuste-Lozano and 13 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney international reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Remote monitoring of automated peritoneal dialysis reduces mortality, adverse events and hospitalizations: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2025
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

23 authors.

Francisco Javier Centellas-PérezAlbacete General University Hospital, Albacete, Spain.
Agustín Ortega-CerratoAlbacete General University Hospital, Albacete, Spain.
Manel VeraHospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain.
Ramón Jesús Devesa-BuchHospital Universitario y politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Eduardo Muñoz-de-BustilloDepartment of Nephrology, Dr. Balmis General University Hospital, Alicante Institute for Health and Biomedical Research (ISABIAL), Alicante, Spain.
Mercedes PratsHospital Joan XXIII, Tarragona, Spain.
Rafael Alonso-ValenteComplexo Universitario Hospitalario de Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain.
José Pedro MoraisComplexo Universitario Hospitalario de Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain.
Paula Jaro Cara-EspadaHospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Claudia Yuste-LozanoHospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
Marco MontomoliHospital Clínico Universitario, Valencia, Spain.
Miguel González-RicoHospital Clínico Universitario, Valencia, Spain.
Beatriz Díez-OjeaHospital Universitario de Torrevieja, Alicante, Spain.
Francesc BarbosaHospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Miren IriarteHospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Carmen FloresHospital Puerto Real, Cádiz, Spain.
Pedro Luís Quirós-GangaHospital Puerto Real, Cádiz, Spain.
Laura EspinelHospital Universitario de Getafe, Madrid, Spain.
Vicente ParaísoHospital del Henares, Madrid, Spain.
María Peña-OrtegaHospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, Spain.
Diana ManzanoHospital Virgen de la Arraixaca, Murcia, Spain.
Bárbara CanchoHospital Universitario de Badajoz, Badajoz, Spain.
Juan Pérez-MartínezAlbacete General University Hospital, Albacete, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the association between the use of remote patient monitoring (RPM) in patients on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology in peritoneal dialysis (SONG-PD) clinical outcomes. Methods: A prospective and multicenter cohort study was conducted on patients with advanced chronic kidney disease on APD, recruited at 16 Spanish Hospitals, between June 1 and December 31, 2021. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts, namely patients on APD with RPM (APD-RPM) and patients on APD without RPM. The primary endpoints were the standardized outcomes of the SONG-PD clinical outcomes: PD-associated infection, cardiovascular disease (CVD), mortality rate, technique survival, and life participation (assessed as health-related quality of life [QoL]). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to evaluate the association of RPM exposure with the clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 232 patients were included, 176 (75.9%) in the APD-RPM group and 56 (24.1%) in the APD-without-RPM group. The mean patient follow-up time was significantly longer in the APD-RPM group than in the APD-without-RPM group (10.4 ± 2.8 vs. 9.4 ± 3.1 months, respectively; Conclusion: The use of RPM programs in patients on APD was associated with better survival of the technique and lower mortality rates. However, after PSM, only technique survival was significant.

Indexed as

chronic kidney diseaseperitoneal dialysisremote patient monitoringstandardized outcomes in nephrologytechnique survivaltelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID38344718
PMCPMC10850997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.