MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3109062197 · doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2020.09.013

Dialysis Initiation and All-Cause Mortality Among Incident Adult Patients With Advanced CKD: A Meta-analysis With Bias Analysis

2020· article· en· W3109062197 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueKidney Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Établissements canadiensImpactMcMaster UniversityPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineConfoundingDialysisMeta-analysisInternal medicineObservational studyKidney diseaseSubgroup analysisCohort studyProportional hazards modelProspective cohort studySurvival analysis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Rationale & ObjectivesDue to unmeasured confounding, observational studies have limitations when assessing whether dialysis initiation reduces mortality compared with conservative therapy among adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). We addressed this issue in this meta-analysis.Study DesignMeta-analysis with bias analysis for unmeasured confounding.Setting & Study PopulationAdults with stage 4 or 5 CKD who had initiated dialysis or conservative treatment.Selection Criteria for StudiesProspective or retrospective cohort studies comparing survival of dialysis versus conservatively managed patients were searched on MEDLINE and Embase from January 2009 to March 20, 2019.Data ExtractionHRs of all-cause mortality associated with dialysis initiation compared with conservative treatment.Analytical ApproachWe pooled HRs using a random-effects model. We estimated the percentage of effect sizes more protective than HRs of 0.80 and severity of unmeasured confounding that could reduce this percentage to only 10%. Subgroup analysis was performed for studies with only older patients (aged ≥ 65 years).Results12 studies were included that involved 16,609 dialysis patients and 3,691 conservatively managed patients. A random-effects model suggested that dialysis initiation was associated with a mean mortality HR of 0.47 (95% CI, 0.34-0.64), in which 92% (95% CI, 50%-100%) of the true effects were more protective than HRs of 0.80. To reduce the percentage of HRs < 0.80 to 10%, unmeasured confounder(s) would need to be associated with both dialysis initiation and mortality by relative risks of 4.05 (95% CI, 2.39-4.15), which is equivalent to shifting each study’s estimated HR by 2.31-fold (95% CI, 1.51-2.36). Restricting studies to include only older patients did not modify the results.LimitationsLimited number of studies and evidence on the absence of publication bias.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that dialysis initiation considerably reduces mortality among adults with advanced CKD. Future bias-adjusted meta-analyses need to assess outcomes beyond mortality. Due to unmeasured confounding, observational studies have limitations when assessing whether dialysis initiation reduces mortality compared with conservative therapy among adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). We addressed this issue in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis with bias analysis for unmeasured confounding. Adults with stage 4 or 5 CKD who had initiated dialysis or conservative treatment. Prospective or retrospective cohort studies comparing survival of dialysis versus conservatively managed patients were searched on MEDLINE and Embase from January 2009 to March 20, 2019. HRs of all-cause mortality associated with dialysis initiation compared with conservative treatment. We pooled HRs using a random-effects model. We estimated the percentage of effect sizes more protective than HRs of 0.80 and severity of unmeasured confounding that could reduce this percentage to only 10%. Subgroup analysis was performed for studies with only older patients (aged ≥ 65 years). 12 studies were included that involved 16,609 dialysis patients and 3,691 conservatively managed patients. A random-effects model suggested that dialysis initiation was associated with a mean mortality HR of 0.47 (95% CI, 0.34-0.64), in which 92% (95% CI, 50%-100%) of the true effects were more protective than HRs of 0.80. To reduce the percentage of HRs < 0.80 to 10%, unmeasured confounder(s) would need to be associated with both dialysis initiation and mortality by relative risks of 4.05 (95% CI, 2.39-4.15), which is equivalent to shifting each study’s estimated HR by 2.31-fold (95% CI, 1.51-2.36). Restricting studies to include only older patients did not modify the results. Limited number of studies and evidence on the absence of publication bias. Our findings suggest that dialysis initiation considerably reduces mortality among adults with advanced CKD. Future bias-adjusted meta-analyses need to assess outcomes beyond mortality.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Méta-analyse · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,074
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,073
Tête enseignante GPT0,305
Écart entre enseignants0,232 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle