ArticleKidney medicine2025
Preliminary Testing of the Discussion of Patient Life Goals Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Dialysis Facilities.
Article in Kidney medicine, 2025. 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.
- Conceptual Development Informing the Kidney Failure Patient Life Goals Survey.Kidney medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rationale & Objectives: To test a new patient-reported outcome measure that assesses end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) maintenance dialysis patients' experience with life goals discussions with their dialysis facility care team. Study Design: Observational cross-sectional study. Survey data collected via REDCap, paper form or telephone in a convenience sample of patients with ESKD receiving maintenance dialysis in the United States. Settings & Participants: People aged 18 years or older with ESKD receiving maintenance hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis in US dialysis facilities between the June and December 2020 study period. Exposures: Testing of 6 items providing the core quality assessment and 1 item measuring whether 1 or more members of the treatment team discussed life goals with the patient. Outcomes: Preliminary reliability and validity of the Discussion of Patient Life Goals survey (D-PaLS). Analytic Approach: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and item response theory methods, including the graded response model (GRM) and differential item functioning (DIF). Results: Of 517 participants, 479 completed the survey via REDCap; 38 completed the survey via paper or telephone. EFA and CFA supported the unidimensionality of the 6 core items. GRM overall and item fit analyses and DIF analyses supported retention of all core items. Preliminary reliability data indicated very good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.84). Known-groups validity was supported whereby individuals receiving home dialysis had more positive responses, than those receiving in-center hemodialysis. Limitations: Study participants were not fully representative of the US ESKD dialysis population. Conclusions: Preliminary analyses indicate the D-PaLS has excellent psychometric properties. The measure provides 2 important quality metrics: facilities' level of engagement talking with patients about their life goals and the percentage of patients reporting who on the treatment team talks with them about their life goals. Additional work is needed to establish comprehensive reliability and validity to support the clinical utility of this measure in patient care.
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.