Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Nephrology and BioMed Central.

Open Access Correspondence

Setting an agenda for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews in CKD care

Deidra C Crews127*, Raquel C Greer3, Jeffrey J Fadrowski24, Michael J Choi1, David Doggett5, Jodi B Segal23, Kemi A Fawole5, Pammie R Crawford5 and L Ebony Boulware236

Author Affiliations

1 Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

2 Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Baltimore, MD, USA

3 Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

4 Division of Pediatric Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics, Baltimore, MD, USA

5 Johns Hopkins Evidence-based Practice Center, Baltimore, MD, USA

6 Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

7 Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, 301 Mason F. Lord Drive, Suite 2500, Baltimore, MD, 21224, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Nephrology 2012, 13:74  doi:10.1186/1471-2369-13-74

Published: 1 August 2012

Abstract

Systematic reviews comparing the effectiveness of strategies to prevent, detect, and treat chronic kidney disease are needed to inform patient care. We engaged stakeholders in the chronic kidney disease community to prioritize topics for future comparative effectiveness research systematic reviews. We developed a preliminary list of suggested topics and stakeholders refined and ranked topics based on their importance. Among 46 topics identified, stakeholders nominated 18 as ‘high’ priority. Most pertained to strategies to slow disease progression, including: (a) treat proteinuria, (b) improve access to care, (c) treat hypertension, (d) use health information technology, and (e) implement dietary strategies. Most (15 of 18) topics had been previously studied with two or more randomized controlled trials, indicating feasibility of rigorous systematic reviews. Chronic kidney disease topics rated by stakeholders as ‘high priority’ are varied in scope and may lead to quality systematic reviews impacting practice and policy.

Keywords:
Chronic kidney disease; Evidence-based practice; Health services research