Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36185707›Full record

ArticleKidney medicine2022

Patient Navigators for CKD and Kidney Failure: A Systematic Review.

Ali Taha, Yasmin Iman, Jay Hingwala, Nicole Askin, Priyanka Mysore, Claudio Rigatto, Clara Bohm, Paul Komenda, Navdeep Tangri, David Collister

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Interdisciplinary Care for Geriatric Syndromes in CKD: A Qualitative Study.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mind the gap in kidney care: Translating what we know into what we do.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Mind the Gap in Kidney Care: Translating What We Know Into What We do.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ali TahaChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Yasmin ImanChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Jay HingwalaChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Nicole AskinLibraries, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Priyanka MysoreChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Claudio RigattoChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Clara BohmChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Paul KomendaChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Navdeep TangriChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
David CollisterChronic Disease Innovation Center, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rationale & Objective: To what degree and how patient navigators improve clinical outcomes for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and kidney failure is uncertain. We performed a systematic review to summarize patient navigator program design, evidence, and implementation in kidney disease. Study Design: A search strategy was developed for randomized controlled trials and observational studies that evaluated the impact of navigators on outcomes in the setting of CKD and kidney failure. Articles were identified from various databases. Two reviewers independently screened the articles and identified those meeting the inclusion criteria. Setting & Participants: Patients with CKD or kidney failure (in-center hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, home hemodialysis, or kidney transplantation). Selection Criteria for Studies: Studies that compared patient navigators with a control, without limits on size, duration, setting, or language. Studies focusing solely on patient education were excluded. Data Extraction: Data were abstracted from full texts and risk of bias was assessed. Analytical Approach: No meta-analysis was performed. Results: Of 3,371 citations, 17 articles met the inclusion criteria including 14 original studies. Navigators came from various healthcare backgrounds including nursing (n=6), social worker (n=2), medical interpreter (n=1), research (n=1), and also included kidney transplant recipients (n=2) and non-medical individuals (n=2). Navigators focused mostly on education (n=9) and support (n = 6). Navigators were used for patients with CKD (n=5), peritoneal dialysis (n=2), in-center hemodialysis (n=4), kidney transplantation (n=2), but not home hemodialysis. Navigators improved transplant workup and listing, peritoneal dialysis utilization, and patient knowledge. Limitations: Many studies did not show benefits across other outcomes, were at a high risk of bias, and none reported cost-effectiveness or patient-reported experience measures. Conclusions: Navigators improve some health outcomes for CKD but there was heterogeneity in their structure and function. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate navigator program efficacy and cost-effectiveness.

Indexed as

Chronic kidney diseasedialysiskidney failurepatient navigatorsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36185707
PMCPMC9516458

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.