Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39990874›Full record

ArticleKidney international reports2025

Identification and Prioritization of Canadian Society of Nephrology Clinical Practice Guideline Topics.

Tyrone G Harrison, Melissa Schorr, Brigitte H Baragar, Gregory L Hundemer, Krista S Ryz, Nancy Verdin, Tania Woodlock, David A Clark, Reem A Mustafa, Anna Mathew and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney international reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors.

Tyrone G HarrisonDepartment of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Melissa SchorrDepartment of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Brigitte H BaragarDepartment of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Gregory L HundemerDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Krista S RyzDepartment of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Nancy VerdinPatient and Community Engagement Research Unit, O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Tania WoodlockKidney Foundation of Canada, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
David A ClarkDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Reem A MustafaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Anna MathewDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Canadian Society of Nephrology Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Nephrology clinical practice guideline topics are routinely determined by clinicians and researchers, without extensive engagement of people with lived experience (PWLE) of kidney disease and their caregivers. The Canadian Society of Nephrology (CSN) Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee (CPGC) completed this modified Delphi study to incorporate diverse stakeholder perspectives in identifying and prioritizing future guideline topics. Methods: We recruited nephrology clinicians, researchers, PWLE of kidney disease or their caregivers for this study. We collated literature-derived guideline topics from international and national guideline organizations that had relevance to nephrology, in addition to suggestions from participants. Consenting participants were taken through a 3 round Delphi survey process, where items were ranked on a 9-point Likert scale in terms of their importance. Based on predetermined consensus criteria, items were accepted as a priority or excluded from further consideration. We ranked the prioritized topics and compared the median ranking between clinicians or researchers and PWLE in the round where consensus was reached. Results: Of the 85 consenting participants, 76 to 78 completed each Delphi round. From the initial list of 100 topics for consideration, 12 were priorities. All stakeholder groups felt it was important for PWLE to be included in topic prioritization and guideline development. The 3 most highly prioritized topics were Conclusion: This study will inform the future nephrology guidelines and commentaries developed by the CSN.

Indexed as

clinical practice guidelinekidney diseasepatient engagementpriority settingtopic prioritization

Identifiers

PMID39990874
PMCPMC11843293

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.