Evidence mapPaperPMID 28856498Full record

SynthesisInternational urology and nephrology2018

The effectiveness of multidisciplinary care models for patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yu Shi, Jiachuan Xiong, Yan Chen, Junna Deng, Hongmei Peng, Jinghong Zhao, Jing He

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International urology and nephrology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Impact of early interruption from pay-for-performance program on progression and medical utilization for patients with early chronic kidney disease.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Yu ShiInstitute of Nephrology of Chongqing and Kidney Center of PLA, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Jiachuan XiongInstitute of Nephrology of Chongqing and Kidney Center of PLA, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Yan ChenInstitute of Nephrology of Chongqing and Kidney Center of PLA, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Junna DengInstitute of Nephrology of Chongqing and Kidney Center of PLA, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Hongmei PengInstitute of Nephrology of Chongqing and Kidney Center of PLA, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Jinghong ZhaoInstitute of Nephrology of Chongqing and Kidney Center of PLA, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Jing HeInstitute of Nephrology of Chongqing and Kidney Center of PLA, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China. hejing55571@163.com.

Funding

Decision consulting and management innovation project of Shapingba District, Chongqing jc201602Humanities and social science fund of Third Military Medical University 2016xrw18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess the efficacy of the multidisciplinary care (MDC) model for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

backgroundThe MDC model has been used in clinical practice for years, but the effectiveness of the MDC model for patients with CKD remains controversial.

methodsEmbase, PubMed, Medline, the Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were used to search for relevant articles. Only randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were pooled. Two independent authors assessed all articles and extracted the data. The efficacy was estimated from the odds ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. A random effects model was used according to the heterogeneity.

resultsTwenty-one studies including 10,284 participants were analyzed. Compared with the non-MDC group, MDC was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and lower hospitalization rates for patients with CKD. In addition, MDC also resulted in a slower eGFR decline and reduced temporary catheterization for patients receiving dialysis. However, according to the subgroup analysis, the lower rates of all-cause mortality in the MDC group were observed only in patients in stage 4-5 and when the staff of the MDC consisted of nephrologists, nurse specialists and professionals from other fields. The most prominent effect of reducing the hospitalization rates was also observed in patients with stage 4-5 but not in patients with stage 4-5 CKD.

conclusionsMDC can lower the all-cause mortality of patients with CKD, reduce temporary catheterization for patients receiving dialysis, decrease the hospitalization rate, and slow the eGFR decline. Moreover, the reduction in all-cause mortality crucially depends on the professionals comprising the MDC staff and the stage of CKD in patients. In addition, the CKD stage influences the hospitalization rates.

Indexed as

HumansPatient Care TeamRenal Insufficiency, ChronicCareChronic kidney diseaseMultidisciplinarySystematic reviews and meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID28856498
PMCPMC5811573

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.