SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Clinical practice guidelines for acute kidney injury: a systematic review of the methodological quality.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Hospitalized patients, particularly those in the ICU, face a significant risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that outline diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for AKI can be valuable tools for healthcare professionals, but their effectiveness hinges on their quality. The research aims to conduct a systematic review focusing on the methodological and reporting quality of CPGs addressing acute kidney injury. Design: A systematic review of CPGs for the management of acute kidney injury in adult patients. Data resources: PubMed and other related databases were systematically searched from January 2012 to January 2023 to collect clinical guidelines and expert consensus on acute kidney injury. After summarizing the basic information, the methodological and reporting quality of the included guidelines or expert consensus was evaluated using the AGREE II and RIGHT tools. Results: A total of 8 CPGs from 6 countries and regions were included in this study, and the period was 2012-2023. In terms of methodological quality, 1 guideline was a level strongly recommended, and 6 were level B, generally recommended guidelines. While the evaluated guidelines demonstrated moderate overall reporting completeness, critical deficiencies persist in contextual transparency and quality assurance protocols, necessitating prioritized remediation in future iterations. Conclusion: Our appraisal identifies the 2012 KDIGO guideline as the highest-quality AKI guidance framework currently available, which has driven global standardization of diagnostic criteria and management protocols. Our analysis reveals critical gaps in the practical applicability and transparency of current clinical practice guidelines, particularly regarding implementation strategies tailored to different populations, such as aging populations. Future iterations must prioritize demographic inclusivity, with explicit recommendations addressing the diagnostic challenges and management complexities of AKI among different populations.
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.