ArticleBMC nephrology2026
Symptom network structure across stigma subgroups in maintenance hemodialysis: a latent profile and network analysis.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2026. 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.
- Turkish validity and reliability study of dialysis-related stigma scale.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMaintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients commonly experience stigma during long-term treatment, yet the characteristics of their subgroups and the associated patterns with symptom burden remain unclear. This study aimed to identify latent subgroups of stigma among MHD patients and depict the symptom network structure of each subgroup.
methodsThis cross-sectional study enrolled 558 MHD patients from two hospitals between March and December 2024. Stigma was assessed using the Social Impact Scale (SIS), symptom burden was assessed using the Modified Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI), subgroups of stigma were identified using latent profile analysis, and complex relationships between symptoms were explored using network analysis. Network comparison tests were performed to evaluate between-group differences in network connectivity.
resultsThe study found that there were three subgroups of MHD patients with stigma: low stigma group (38.5%), moderate stigma group (49.6%), and high stigma group (11.8%). The network analysis showed that muscle pain, sadness, and chest pain were the core symptom nodes in the overall sample. Stable symptom networks were observed in the low and moderate stigma groups, with core symptoms differing by subgroup (physical symptoms in the low stigma group vs. emotional symptom in the moderate stigma group), though no significant difference in global network strength was found between these two groups.
conclusionsStigma among MHD patients presents distinct heterogeneous subgroup characteristics, and there are core symptoms with high connection strength in the symptom network. The difficulty in recruiting patients with high stigma reflects the concealment of this population. Future studies should adopt longitudinal designs and expand the sample size of the high stigma subgroup to verify the value of core symptoms in symptom management. 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.