| Title |
Rationale and design of the Helping Ease Renal failure with Bupi Yishen compared with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (HERBAAL) trial: a randomized controlled trial in non-diabetes stage 4 chronic kidney disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12906-015-0830-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei Mao, Lei Zhang, Chuan Zou, Chuang Li, Yifan Wu, Guobin Su, Xinfeng Guo, Yuchi Wu, Fuhua Lu, Qizhan Lin, Lixin Wang, Kun Bao, Peng Xu, Daixin Zhao, Yu Peng, Hui Liang, Zhaoyu Lu, Yanxiang Gao, Xina Jie, La Zhang, Zehuai Wen, Xusheng Liu |
| Abstract |
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global public health problem. Currently, as for advanced CKD populations, medication options limited in angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), which were partially effective. A Chinese herbal compound, Bupi Yishen formula, has showed renal protective potential in experiments and retrospective studies. This study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of Bupi Yishen formula (BYF) in patients with CKD stage 4. In this double blind, double dummy, randomized controlled trial (RCT), there will be 554 non-diabetes stage 4 CKD patients from 16 hospitals included and randomized into two groups: Chinese medicine (CM) group or losartan group. All patients will receive basic conventional therapy. Patients in CM group will be treated with BYF daily while patients in control group will receive losartan 100 mg daily for one year. The primary outcome is the change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of endpoint events, liver and kidney function, urinary protein creatinine ratio, cardiovascular function and quality of life. This study will be the first multi-center, double blind RCT to assess whether BYF, compared with losartan, will have beneficial effects on eGFR for non-diabetes stage 4 CKD patients. The results will help to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinicians. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Number: ChiCTR-TRC-10001518 . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 42% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 March 2016.
All research outputs
#17,795,140
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#2,353
of 3,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,376
of 267,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#54
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 267,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.