↓ Skip to main content

Dietary interventions for mineral and bone disorder in people with chronic kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 news outlet
1 policy source
19 X users


40 Dimensions

Readers on

195 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Dietary interventions for mineral and bone disorder in people with chronic kidney disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010350.pub2
Pubmed ID

Zhuangzhu Liu, Guobin Su, Xinfeng Guo, Yifan Wu, Xusheng Liu, Chuan Zou, Lei Zhang, Qianchun Yang, Yuan Xu, Weizhong Ma


Chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD) is a systemic dysfunction of mineral and bone metabolism in people with CKD. Recent research shows that phosphate retention plays a significant role in the development of CKD-MBD. Compared with drug therapies, dietary interventions may be simple, inexpensive and feasible for phosphate retention. However, there is little evidence to support these interventions. Our objective was to assess the benefits and harms of any dietary intervention for preventing and treating CKD-MBD. We searched Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 27 August 2015 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. We also searched the Chinese Biomedicine Database (CBM) (1976 to August 2015), China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database (CNKI) (1979 to August 2015), and VIP (1989 to August 2015). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at dietary interventions for prevention or treatment of CKD-MBD were eligible for inclusion. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility, methodological quality, and extracted data. Continuous outcomes (serum calcium level, serum phosphorus level, calcium × phosphate product, parathyroid hormone (PTH), fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF-23) and alkaline phosphatase) were expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Dichotomous outcomes (mortality) were expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We used a random-effects model to meta-analyse studies. Nine studies were included in this review which analysed 634 participants. Study duration ranged from 4 to 24 weeks. The interventions included calcium-enriched bread, low phosphorus intake, low protein intake, very low protein intake, post haemodialysis supplements and hypolipaemic diet. Only one study reported death; none of the included studies reported cardiovascular events or fractures. There was insufficient reporting of design and methodological aspects among the included studies to enable robust assessment of risk of bias.There was limited and low-quality evidence to indicate that calcium-enriched bread increased serum calcium (1 study, 53 participants: MD -0.16 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.31), decreased serum phosphorus (53 participants: MD -0.41 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.31) and decreased the calcium × phosphate product (53 participants: MD -0.62 mmol²/L², 95% CI -0.77 to -0.47).Very low protein intake was not superior to conventional low protein intake in terms of effect on serum phosphorus (2 studies, 41 participants: MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.25), serum calcium (MD 0.00 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.17), or alkaline phosphatase (MD -22.00 U/L, 95% CI -78.25 to 34.25). PTH was significantly lower in the very low protein intake group (2 studies, 41 participants: MD -69.64 pmol/L, 95% CI -139.83 to 0.54).One study reported no significant difference in the number of deaths between low phosphorus intake and normal diet (279 participants: RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.82). Low phosphorus intake decreased serum phosphorus (2 studies, 359 participants: MD -0.18 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07; I(2) = 0%).One study reported post-haemodialysis supplements did not increase serum phosphorus compared to normal diet (40 participants: MD 0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.49).One study reported low phosphorus intake plus lanthanum carbonate significantly decreased FGF-23 (19 participants: MD -333.80 RU/mL, 95% CI -526.60 to -141.00), but did not decrease serum phosphorus (19 participants: MD -0.10 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.38 to 0.58) or PTH (19 participants: MD 31.60 pg/mL, 95% CI -29.82 to 93.02). There was limited low quality evidence to indicate that dietary interventions (calcium-enriched bread or low phosphorus/protein intake) may positively affect CKD-MBD by increasing serum calcium, decreasing serum phosphorus, the calcium × phosphate product and FGF-23. Large and well-designed RCTs are needed to evaluate the effects of various interventions for people with CKD-MBD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 <1%
Unknown 194 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 20%
Student > Bachelor 23 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 9%
Researcher 16 8%
Other 14 7%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 54 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 65 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 5%
Psychology 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 22 11%
Unknown 65 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 30 June 2019.
All research outputs
of 25,389,116 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 12,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 260,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,389,116 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 260,252 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 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 60% of its contemporaries.