Observational studyClinical and experimental nephrology2025
The diagnostic status of chronic kidney disease in a real-world database in Japan: CHECK-CKD.
Observational study in Clinical and experimental nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence-practice gaps in chronic kidney disease management among patients taking antidiabetic or antihypertensive medications: a nationwide analysis of Japanese primary care electronic health records.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2026Observational
- Review no. 1: designing clinical kidney research using real-world data: research questions, data sources, and analytical skills.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease (CKD) in 2018 and the launch of the first therapeutic agent in 2021 are expected to have improved CKD management in Japan. However, the reality of CKD diagnosis in this environment is poorly understood. Here, we conducted a retrospective observational study.
methodsWe investigated the changes in CKD diagnosis rates, the characteristics of diagnosed cases, and the prognostic impact of the timing of diagnosis by using a database of administrative claims and medical checkups from 2014 to 2023 (DeSC Healthcare Inc.™) for patients with a potential risk of CKD (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m
resultsWe extracted 287,999 patients who newly met the diagnostic criteria for CKD at a medical checkup. The rate of new CKD diagnosis remained ~ 3% until 2021. Factors associated with CKD diagnosis included blood/urine tests at a medical institution (odds ratio [OR] 4.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.92-4.31; OR 5.02, 95% CI 4.82-5.22) and presence of comorbidities: anemia (OR 2.30; 95% CI 2.16-2.45), heart failure (OR 1.87; 95% CI 1.76-1.98), and diabetes (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.76-1.91). The incidence of cardiorenal-related events at 36 months after the date when patients newly met the CKD diagnostic criteria was 4.5% and 12.4% for those diagnosed at stage 3a and 3b, respectively.
conclusionsThe prevalence of CKD diagnosis was low and renal function tests were infrequently performed. Periodic blood/urine tests may help clinicians to detect CKD in an early phase. STUDY REGISTRATION: UMIN000052393.
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.