ArticleBMJ open2024
UK survey of patient and caregiver perspectives on the impact of chronic kidney disease-associated anaemia.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChronic kidney disease (CKD)-associated anaemia has substantial biopsychosocial impacts. This study explores the impact of CKD-associated anaemia and treatment preferences from the patient perspective.
designCross-sectional survey.
settingAnonymised online survey implemented by Ipsos UK on behalf of the National Kidney Federation and GSK from October 2022 to January 2023.
participantsData were collected from UK adults living with CKD (self-reported). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures were exploratory and not predefined. The cross-sectional survey was designed to explore the biopsychosocial impact of living with anaemia on individuals with CKD; their unmet needs; the treatment strategies typically implemented and the associated barriers/facilitators to adherence; the healthcare professional-patient relationship with regard to anaemia diagnosis and management.
resultsOf 101 participants, 90 (89%) were patients with CKD and 11 (11%) were informal carers. 96 (95%) participants reported symptom(s) relevant to their experience of CKD. 88 (87%) participants reported symptom(s) associated with anaemia and 61 (64%) expressed an impact on daily life including 18 (19%) unable to perform daily activities, 13 (14%) unable to go to work and 9 (9%) reporting poor social life/interactions. 85 (84%) participants reported they have received treatment for anaemia: intravenous iron (n=55, 54%), iron tablets (n=29, 29%), erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) via an autoinjector (n=28, 28%), ESA injections via a syringe (n=24, 24%), ESA injections via a dialysis machine (n=17, 17%), folic acid (n=22, 22%) and blood transfusion (n=17, 17%). Six of seven (86%) participants who received their ESA from a healthcare professional at home preferred injections whereas 13/27 (48%) participants who injected themselves at home preferred oral tablets.
conclusionsThere is not a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to the management of CKD-associated anaemia. A personalised approach incorporating the treatment preferences of the individual should be explored when discussing treatment options.
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.