ArticleBMJ open2026
Critical appraisal and comparison of clinical practice guideline recommendations for the treatment of anaemia in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
introductionIn chronic kidney disease (CKD), anaemia develops and evolves as kidney dysfunction progresses. The treatment of anaemia is described in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), which are designed to report the most relevant evidence for clinical practice in disease management. This study will analyse CPGs for transparency, methodological quality and quality of recommendations for their implementation over time, and also compare recommendations for the treatment of anaemia outlined in these documents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: CPGs will be identified by conducting a systematic search of the data sources CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Scielo, Scopus, ProQuest, Trip Database, Virtual Health Library, Web of Science, and guidelines on websites, published between January 2009 and December 2025. Three reviewers will, independently, evaluate the methodological quality of the guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) tool and the quality of recommendations using the AGREE - Recommendations Excellence tool. The treatment recommendations for anaemia in CKD will be summarised and compared. Results will be presented in tables and descriptive statistics will be compiled for all domains of the tools. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a literature-based study and, therefore, no ethical approval will be required. Results of the study can be submitted for publication in high-impact, peer-reviewed scientific journals, and also presented at national and international conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024629656.
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.