ArticleEJIFCC2025
Standardizing The Biochemical Tests for Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD): Where Do We Stand? A National Survey of Laboratories Across Pakistan.
Article in EJIFCC, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Laboratory diagnostics of chronic kidney disease in Serbia: Current practice and priorities for harmonisation.Journal of medical biochemistry · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: CKD affects 8.6% of the global population, with South Asian countries seeing prevalence rates between 10.6% and 23.3%, including 21.2% in Pakistan. CKD's burden is further exacerbated in South Asia due to rising hypertension and diabetes. Accurate estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and albuminuria are vital for CKD management. Despite increasing CKD studies, regional testing remains underdeveloped. This survey evaluates CKD testing practices in Pakistan, aiming to propose recommendations for improving uniformity, enhancing surveillance, and advancing CKD care standards. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted by the Chemical Pathology section at Aga Khan University (AKU) using a validated questionnaire developed by International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) which was modified for local context. The survey, distributed via Google Forms to major laboratories across Pakistan, focused on CKD testing methods. Data were analyzed using Excel (Microsoft Corporation, 2018) software. Results: A total of 13 laboratories participated in the survey. All laboratories measured serum creatinine, while two measured serum cystatin C, eleven measured urinary protein, and ten measured urinary albumin. GFR was estimated using equations in 10 laboratories, with CKD-EPI 2021 (29%), MDRD (22%), and CKD-EPI Pak (14%) being the most commonly used. However, only six laboratories employed pediatric equations for children. Significant variability was observed in the testing methods for serum creatinine, urinary protein, and urinary albumin. Conclusion: Our findings emphasize the urgent need to standardize CKD testing in Pakistan. Inconsistencies in estimated GFR reporting, serum creatinine measurement and proteinuria testing highlight the need for harmonized protocols to improve diagnosis, management, and public health outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40584985PMC12205145What 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.