ArticleBMC nephrology2025
Non-traditional barriers to participation in pharmacologic chronic kidney disease clinical trials.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Agenda for Sustainable Development agenda prioritizes access to care for non-communicable diseases, including chronic kidney disease (CKD), and sustainable cities and communities. City-level health may impact local research capacity and subsequent participation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We identified city-level barriers to CKD RCT participation in the cities from the Global Observatory of Healthy and Sustainable Cities (GOHSC).
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of 214 drug CKD RCTs (2003–2023) with participants spanning 146 GOHSC sites. We queried open datasets to retrieve relevant financial, urban, healthcare, and nephrology-related indicators. We designed a CKD research capacity scale incorporating six variables: population-weighted RCTs, sites per sqkm, funding, site span, facility type, RCTs per site. We classified research capacity as absent (0–1 points), insufficient (2–4), fair (6–7), good (7–8), or excellent (9–10) and compared indicators between research capacity categories.
resultsOf the included cities, Odense had the highest population-weighted RCT count (7.01 RCTs per 100,000 population), and Mexico City had the lowest (0.06 RCTs per 100,000 population). Cities with good or excellent research capacity had higher health expenditures, nephrologists, and dialysis centers per million population than cities with absent or insufficient research capacity. In cities with good or excellent research capacity, the most prevalent type of insurance coverage for CKD was public, whereas mixed financing was the most frequent type in cities with absent or insufficient research capacity. Among the identified non-traditional barriers to CKD RCT participation, daily living score, access to public transport, access to open spaces, and access to a fresh food market were higher in cities with good or excellent research capacity, compared to those with lower research capacity scores.
conclusionsWe found differences in CKD research capacity across the cities included in the GOHSC Study Collaboration, which may be affected by financial, socio-demographic, healthcare, and nephrology-related barriers. Local, regional, and international initiatives should address distinctive local variations to enhance CKD research capacity. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable
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.