ArticlePaediatrics & child health2025
The landscape of inter-institutional and multinational collaborations in Kawasaki disease.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Importance of Fostering International Collaboration for Optimal Outcomes of Kawasaki Disease Worldwide: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Guideline
- Clinical Practice Variation Among Pediatric Rheumatologists Treating Kawasaki Disease: Results of a North American Survey.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
47 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Integrated research potentiates evidence-based knowledge, particularly for uncommon diseases such as Kawasaki disease (KD). The 14th International Kawasaki Disease Symposium focussed on "Fostering global collaborations to solve KD," circulated a 23-question survey highlighting existing collaborations. Methods: Information was collected from KD collaborative groups. One or more of the following characteristics defined a collaborative effort: recurrent clinical trials collaborations; international, national, or inter-state research; multi-institutional research; national, government-funded or government-appointed research; epidemiology group; focus group on KD practice and science or other health organization chapters. Results: Responses from 21 groups were limited to a single country (67%). The groups had formed between 1991 and 2022. The multi-institutional groups included a median of 1 to 20 countries composed of 2-150 institutions. The groups included 10-20 active members (38%), 20-50 members (38%), 50-100 (14%), or more than 100 members (10%). A majority (67%) of collaborations produced 2-11 peer-reviewed publications. Groups operated under a centralized governance structure (62%), with a steering committee (92%), bylaws (23%), membership fees (8%), or another structure (8%). Only 33% had a written mission statement. While 48% had no formal funding sources, the remainder were funded by granting agencies (29%), governmental funding (24%), private donations and fundraising drives (19%), industry support (10%), and other sources (5%). Conclusions: The majority of polled collaborative KD groups are multicenter and national. Despite the lack of funding, most groups demonstrate successful collaborations that result in peer-reviewed publications. There is a need for advocacy to support funding for these important collaborative groups.
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.