ArticlePloS one2025
Self-care in haemodialysis treatment tasks in community and hospital-based units: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Staff perceptions of patient self-care in hemodialysis treatment tasks: a qualitative exploration using the Exploration Preparation Implementation Sustainment Framework.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Nurse-Facilitated Self-Management in Peritoneal Dialysis: A Cross-Sectional Study from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient self-care improves outcomes in chronic diseases, yet patients in haemodialysis units tend to be passive recipients of treatments. PURPOSE: To explore patient self-care in haemodialysis tasks and identify factors influencing interest and participation.
methodsPatient interest and participation were assessed using a Likert-type scale. Associations were tested with bi-variate analysis and logistic regression, accounting for hemodialysis unit type.
resultsQuestionnaires from 339 patients in hospital and community-based units showed 89.1% expressed interest in care tasks. Lower education (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.9) and being single (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12-0.6) decreased interest. Participation in treatment tasks was observed in 40.1% of patients. Lesser odds of participation were seen amongst those of Jewish religion (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.02-0.54), and dialyzing in community units (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25-0.76), whereas higher odds were seen in people reporting higher economic status (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.44-4.93), venous access via arteriovenous shunts (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.98-5.54), more years on dialysis (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.06-3.24), and participants expressing interest in participation (OR 6.01, 95% CI 2.18-16.53). A larger proportion of patients who were not interested in participation were from community-based units (75.7%), compared to those who expressed at least some interest (61%).
conclusionsWhile most patients expressed interest in participating, only a minority actually participated. There is need for greater engagement of interested patients. Organizational factors play an important role in determining actual participation, above and beyond personal patient factors. Patients should be presented with the opportunity to participate according to their interest and capabilities.
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.