Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39362958›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2024

A systematic review and quality assessment of economic evaluations of kidney replacement therapies in end-stage kidney disease.

Patricia Nyokabi, Sitaporn Youngkong, Bhavani Shankara Bagepally, Tabitha Okech, Usa Chaikledkaew, Gareth J McKay, John Attia, Ammarin Thakkinstian

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Patricia NyokabiMahidol University Health Technology Assessment Graduate Program, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sitaporn YoungkongMahidol University Health Technology Assessment Graduate Program, Bangkok, Thailand. sitaporn.you@mahidol.edu.
Bhavani Shankara BagepallyIndian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, India.
Tabitha OkechMahidol University Health Technology Assessment Graduate Program, Bangkok, Thailand.
Usa ChaikledkaewMahidol University Health Technology Assessment Graduate Program, Bangkok, Thailand. usa.chi@mahidol.ac.th.
Gareth J McKayCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
John AttiaCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia.
Ammarin ThakkinstianMahidol University Health Technology Assessment Graduate Program, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1087363
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is fatal without treatment by kidney replacement therapies (KRTs). However, access to these treatment modalities can be problematic given the high costs. This systematic review (SR) aims to provide an updated economic evaluation of pairwise comparisons of KRTs and the implications for the proportion of patients with access to the KRT modalities, i.e., kidney transplantation (KT), hemodialysis (HD), and peritoneal dialysis (PD). This SR was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020. We searched studies in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) registry, from inception to March 2023. Thirteen studies were included with pairwise comparisons among three KRTs, with varying proportions of patients for each modality. Seven studies were from high-income countries, including five from Europe. Summary findings are presented on a cost-effectiveness plane and incremental net benefit (INB). KT was the most cost-effective intervention across the pairwise comparisons. KT and PD were both more cost-effective alternatives to HD. HD was more costly and less effective than PD in all studies except one. Concurrent efforts to increase both KT and PD represented the best scenario to improve treatment options for ESKD patients.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisKidney Failure, ChronicRenal Replacement TherapyHumansKidney TransplantationPeritoneal DialysisRenal DialysisEconomic evaluationEnd-stage kidney diseaseKidney replacement therapiesSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39362958
PMCPMC11450173

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.