Observational studyBMJ open2025
Patterns of follow-up testing of abnormal eGFR and UACR for the detection of chronic kidney disease in Australian primary care: analysis of a national general practice dataset.
Observational study in BMJ open, 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.
- Predicting High-Risk CKD in Japanese People: Model Development and Validation.Kidney international reports · 2026Article
- Impact of eGFR-based physician-visit recommendations on CKD-related clinical practices following health screening: a regression discontinuity study.BMC nephrology · 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
objectiveTo evaluate the patterns of abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urine albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) follow-up testing for the detection of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Australian general practices.
designRetrospective, population-based observational study. SETTING AND
participants2 717 966 adults who visited a MedicineInsight participating general practice between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2020, had ≥1 serum creatinine measurement (with or without a UACR measurement) and did not have CKD at baseline.
main outcome measure'Guideline-concordant follow-up' was defined as having a record of a repeat eGFR or UACR testing (assessed separately) within 6 months following the abnormal (eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m
resultsA total of 220 841 and 114 889 patients with an abnormal incident eGFR and UACR result, respectively, were identified. Nearly half (45.0%) of the patients with an abnormal eGFR result and over two-thirds (69.7%) of the patients with an abnormal UACR result did not have a follow-up test within 6 months. Patient factors associated with a higher likelihood of follow-up eGFR testing included indicators of poorer baseline health and greater CKD risk, such as comorbid diabetes (adjusted OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.40) or more severe incident eGFR (adjusted ORs for eGFR categories 30-44, 15-29 and <15 mL/min/1.73 m², respectively, vs eGFR 45-59 mL/min/1.73 m²: 1.51 (1.47 to 1.55), 1.85 (1.76 to 1.95) and 1.62 (1.47 to 1.78)). Higher incident UACR level was associated with greater follow-up UACR testing (adjusted OR for severely increased albuminuria vs moderately increased albuminuria (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.48).
conclusionsIn this large, population-based study, we observed substantial gaps in the follow-up of abnormal eGFR and UACR for the detection of CKD in primary care settings. Effective strategies to optimise follow-up testing for CKD detection are needed.
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.