↓ Skip to main content

Meal phosphate variability does not support fixed dose phosphate binder schedules for patients treated with peritoneal dialysis: a prospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, December 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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Meal phosphate variability does not support fixed dose phosphate binder schedules for patients treated with peritoneal dialysis: a prospective cohort study
Published in
BMC Nephrology, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12882-015-0205-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Leung, Brendan McCormick, Jessica Wagner, Mohan Biyani, Susan Lavoie, Rameez Imtiaz, Deborah Zimmerman

Abstract

Removal of phosphate by peritoneal dialysis is insufficient to maintain normal serum phosphate levels such that most patients must take phosphate binders with their meals. However, phosphate 'counting' is complicated and many patients are simply prescribed a specific dose of phosphate binders with each meal. Therefore, our primary objective was to assess the variability in meal phosphate content to determine the appropriateness of this approach. In this prospective cohort study, adult patients with ESRD treated with peritoneal dialysis and prescribed phosphate binder therapy were eligible to participate. Participants were excluded from the study if they were unable to give consent, had hypercalcemia, were visually or hearing impaired or were expected to receive a renal transplant during the time of the study. After providing informed consent, patients kept a 3-day diet diary that included all foods and beverages consumed in addition to portion sizes. At the same time, patients documented the amount of phosphate binders taken with each meal. The phosphate content of the each meal was estimated using ESHA Food Processor SQL Software by a registered dietitian. Meal phosphate and binder variability were estimated by the Intra Class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) where 0 indicates maximal variability and 1 indicates no variability. Seventy-eight patients consented to participate in the study; 18 did not complete the study protocol. The patients were 60 (± 17) years, predominately male (38/60) and Caucasian (51/60). Diabetic nephropathy was the most common cause of end stage kidney disease. The daily phosphate intake including snacks ranged from 959 ± 249 to 1144 ± 362 mg. The phosphate ICC by meal: breakfast 0.63, lunch 0.16; supper 0.27. The phosphate binder ICC by meal: breakfast 0.68, lunch 0.73, supper 0.67. The standard prescription of a set number of phosphate binders with each meal is not supported by the data; patients do not appear to be adjusting their binders to match the meal phosphate content. An easy to use phosphate counting program that assists the patient in determining the appropriate amount of phosphate binder to take may enhance phosphate 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Master 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 17 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 10 November 2016.
All research outputs
#4,112,786
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#428
of 2,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,942
of 389,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#8
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st 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 82% 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 389,036 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.