↓ Skip to main content

Nephrology co-management versus primary care solo management for early chronic kidney disease: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
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.
Title
Nephrology co-management versus primary care solo management for early chronic kidney disease: a retrospective cross-sectional analysis
Published in
BMC Nephrology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12882-015-0154-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lipika Samal, Adam Wright, Sushrut S. Waikar, Jeffrey A. Linder

Abstract

Primary care physicians (PCPs) typically manage early chronic kidney disease (CKD), but recent guidelines recommend nephrology co-management for some patients with stage 3 CKD and all patients with stage 4 CKD. We sought to compare quality of care for co-managed patients to solo managed patients. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Patients included in the study were adults who visited a PCP during 2009 with laboratory evidence of CKD in the preceding two years, defined as two estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR) between 15-59 mL/min/1.73 m(2) separated by 90 days. We assessed process measures (serum eGFR test, urine protein/albumin test, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker [ACE/ARB] prescription, and several tests monitoring for complications) and intermediate clinical outcomes (mean blood pressure and blood pressure control) and performed subgroup analyses by CKD stage. Of 3118 patients, 11 % were co-managed by a nephrologist. Co-management was associated with younger age (69 vs. 74 years), male gender (46 % vs. 34 %), minority race/ethnicity (black 32 % vs. 22 %; Hispanic 13 % vs. 8 %), hypertension (75 % vs. 66 %), diabetes (42 % vs. 26 %), and more PCP visits (5.0 vs. 3.9; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). After adjustment, co-management was associated with serum eGFR test (98 % vs. 94 %, p = <0.0001), urine protein/albumin test (82 % vs 36 %, p < 0.0001), and ACE/ARB prescription (77 % vs. 69 %, p = 0.03). Co-management was associated with monitoring for anemia and metabolic bone disease, but was not associated with lipid monitoring, differences in mean blood pressure (133/69 mmHg vs. 131/70 mmHg, p > 0.50) or blood pressure control. A subgroup analysis of Stage 4 CKD patients did not show a significant association between co-management and ACE/ARB prescription (80 % vs. 73 %, p = 0.26). For stage 3 and 4 CKD patients, nephrology co-management was associated with increased stage-appropriate monitoring and ACE/ARB prescribing, but not improved blood pressure control.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Researcher 10 11%
Other 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 25 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Psychology 4 5%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 34 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 22 October 2015.
All research outputs
#4,558,151
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#497
of 2,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,856
of 279,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#4
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,470 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 279,097 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.