ArticleClinical kidney journal2023
The centre-calculated cutoff value is better for identifying fast peritoneal solute transfer of patients on peritoneal dialysis than the traditional value: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patients With Nonfast Peritoneal Transfer Rate are More Suitable for Incremental Peritoneal Dialysis.Kidney international reports · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The mean 4-h dialysate to plasma ratio of creatinine (4-h D/Pcr) is a vital cutoff value for recognizing the fast peritoneal solute transfer rate (PSTR) in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD); however, it shows a noticeable centre effect. We aimed to investigate our centre-calculated cutoff value (CCV) of 4-h D/Pcr and compare it with the traditional cutoff value (TCV) (0.65). Methods: In this study, we enrolled incident PD patients at our centre from 2008 to 2019, and divided them into fast or non-fast PSTR groups according to baseline 4-h D/Pcr-based CCV or TCV. We compared the efficiency of the fast PSTR recognized by two cutoff values in predicting mortality, ultrafiltration (UF) insufficiency and technical survival. Results: In total, 1905 patients were enrolled, with a mean 4-h D/Pcr of 0.71 ± 0.11. Compared with TCV (0.65), CCV (0.71) showed superiority in predicting mortality of PD patients [hazard ratio (HR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.59 vs HR 1.24, 95% CI 0.97-1.59]. The odds ratio (OR) of the fast PSTR in centre classification was slightly higher than traditional classification in predicting UF insufficiency (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.25-2.24 vs OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.15-2.22). Additionally, the restricted cubic splines 4-h D/Pcr has an S-shaped association with mortality and UF insufficiency, and the inflection points of 4-h D/Pcr were 0.71 (equal to CCV). Conclusions: The CCV of 4-h D/Pcr for identifying fast PSTR was 0.71. It was superior to TCV in predicting mortality and UF insufficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.