↓ Skip to main content

Influence of Nephrologist Care on Management and Outcomes in Adults with Chronic Kidney Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
Influence of Nephrologist Care on Management and Outcomes in Adults with Chronic Kidney Disease
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11606-015-3452-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana C. Ricardo, Jason A. Roy, Kaixiang Tao, Arnold Alper, Jing Chen, Paul E. Drawz, Jeffrey C. Fink, Chi-yuan Hsu, John W. Kusek, Akinlolu Ojo, Martin Schreiber, Michael J. Fischer, on behalf of the CRIC Study Investigators

Abstract

Predialysis nephrology care for adults with late stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with improved outcomes. Less is known about the effects of nephrology care in earlier stages of CKD. We aimed to evaluate the effect of nephrology care on management of CKD risk factors and complications, CKD progression, incident cardiovascular disease (CVD), and death. This was a prospective cohort study. Participants included 3855 men and women aged 21 to 74 years enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study with a mean (SD) estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at entry of 45 (17) ml/min/1.73 m(2), followed for a median of 6.6 years. The main predictor was self-reported prior contact with a nephrologist at study enrollment. Outcomes evaluated included CKD progression (≥ 50 % eGFR loss or end-stage renal disease), incident CVD, and death. Two-thirds (67 %) of the participants reported prior contact with a nephrologist at study enrollment. They were younger, more likely to be male, non-Hispanic white, and had lower eGFR and higher urine protein (p < 0.05). A subgroup with eGFR 30- < 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and prior contact with a nephrologist were more likely to receive pharmacologic treatment for CKD-related complications and to report angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ACEi/ARB) use. After propensity score matching (for reporting prior contact with a nephrologist vs. not) and adjusting for demographic and clinical variables, prior contact with a nephrologist was not significantly associated with CKD progression, incident CVD or death (p > 0.05). One-third of CRIC participants had not seen a nephrologist before enrollment, and this prior contact was subject to age, sex, and ethnic-related disparities. While prior nephrology care was associated with more frequent treatment of CKD complications and use of ACEi/ARB medications, there was neither an association between this care and achievement of guideline-recommended intermediate measures, nor long-term adverse outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 6 8%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 23 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Psychology 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 25 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,272,753
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,512
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,717
of 266,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#39
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.