Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40606775›Full record

ReviewCanadian journal of kidney health and disease2025

The Canadian Society of Nephrology Methods for Developing and Adapting Clinical Practice Guidelines: An Update.

Somaya Zahran, Anna Mathew, Tyrone G Harrison, Arenn Jauhal, Michelle A Hladunewich, Reem A Mustafa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Canadian journal of kidney health and disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Somaya ZahranDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0112-0894
Anna MathewDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Tyrone G HarrisonDepartment of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1068-8673
Arenn JauhalDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University Health Network, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5246-8324
Michelle A HladunewichDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9227-4292
Reem A MustafaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose of the review: In this article, we provide an update on the Canadian Society of Nephrology's (CSN) process of identifying candidate topics and subsequent development of guidelines and commentaries using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT methodology. We revise the process of adapting existing guidelines with the inclusion of Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) practice points. We also describe challenges of implementing guidelines and suggest solutions to address this with description of the CSN approach to disseminating and implementing guidelines. Sources of information: The update reflects internal CSN documentation, stakeholder consultation for topic prioritization, and integration of methodological guidance from GRADE-ADOLOPMENT and international sources such as KDIGO. Methods: We reviewed and synthesized the CSN's current guideline-development process, which includes a detailed examination of internal documentation, meeting summaries, and publicly available methodological frameworks with specific focus on the application of the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach. We analyzed how recommendations and practice points from KDIGO are assessed for relevance, updated based on Canadian context, and integrated into the final commentary using GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks. We also examined how conflict of interest is managed, how working groups are structured, and how recommendations are prioritized. In addition, we explored the CSN's evolving strategies for dissemination and implementation, including stakeholder engagement, survey feedback, and use of knowledge-translation tools. Key findings: The CSN follows a transparent and rigorous process in guideline and commentary development. This comprehensive process considers the best-available evidence, balancing desirable and undesirable effects and patients' values, perspectives, and implications for the Canadian health care system including resources, equity, acceptability, and feasibility to maximize guideline implementation and advance the health of Canadians. Limitations: The CSN updated methods reflect the current process and may not be generalizable to other guideline organizations. The impact of CSN commentaries on clinical practice, decision-making, and policy uptake has not been formally evaluated, limiting our understanding of their contribution to health system improvement and patient outcomes. Implications: This review updates the CSN's processes for commentary working groups to identify relevant international guidelines, establish the level of agreement on included recommendations, incorporate perspectives of people with lived experience, and adjust the final product to the Canadian healthcare system before dissemination.

Indexed as

Canadian Society of Nephrologyclinical practice guidelinecommentaryGRADEguidelines developmentpractice pointsrecommendations

Identifiers

PMID40606775
PMCPMC12214302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.