Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39737781›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic apheresis and dialysis : official peer-reviewed journal of the International Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy2026

The impact of "nurse-led education" vs. "nurse-led education plus peer support" on patients' decision for peritoneal dialysis treatment in chronic kidney disease patients.

Şimal Köksal Cevher, Neşe Altınok Ersoy, Ezgi Çoşkun Yenigün, Mehmet Tuncay, Selim Turgay Arınsoy, Erdem Çankaya, Fatih Dede

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic apheresis and dialysis : official peer-reviewed journal of the International Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Şimal Köksal CevherDepartment of Nephrology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6502-2399
Neşe Altınok ErsoyFaculty of Nursing, Internal Disease Nursing Department, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5081-4035
Ezgi Çoşkun YenigünDepartment of Nephrology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5963-605X
Mehmet TuncayDepartment of Nephrology, Gaziantep City Hospital, Gaziantep, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5204-0253
Selim Turgay ArınsoyFaculty of Medicine, Department of Nephrology, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7268-055X
Erdem ÇankayaFaculty of Medicine, Department of Nephrology, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3971-3318
Fatih DedeDepartment of Nephrology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5737-9854

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEnd-stage kidney disease patients face a critical decision regarding kidney replacement therapy options, which include kidney transplantation, hemodialysis, or peritoneal dialysis (PD). This study aims to evaluate the impact of nurse-led education (NE) alone vs. NE combined with peer support on the patients' decision over PD treatment in chronic kidney disease patients.

methodsThe study was conducted between 2018 and 2020, and patients were prospectively followed for the years 2018-2020. A total of 238 patients were selected from 500 outpatient clinic patients based on inclusion criteria and the principle of voluntary participation. Among 238 patients, 112 patients who received NE plus peer support as well as NE. Generalized linear models (GLM) analysis was employed to investigate the influence of NE and NE plus peer support on the decision of PD by patients.

resultsIn the NE plus peer support group, 38% were aged 45-59, and 65% were male. Similarly, in the NE group, 38% were aged 45-59, and 60% were male. The study utilized GLM to analyze patients' decisions regarding the PD treatment. Model 1 examined the duration of NE plus peer support (Akaike Information Criterion [AIC] = 130.46, McFadden's pseudo-R-squared (ρ

conclusionsEducation provided by nurse and supported by peer affects patients' decision of kidney replacement treatment. Through the implementation of effective peer education, healthcare providers can enable patients to make informed decisions that align with their personal values, preferences, and treatment objectives, thereby enhancing clinical outcomes and overall patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

Decision MakingKidney Failure, ChronicPatient Education as TopicPeritoneal DialysisAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPeer GroupProspective Studiesdecision‐makingkidney replacement therapynurse‐led educationpeer supportperitoneal dialysis

Identifiers

PMID39737781
PMCPMC13540495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.