Prognostic Models in Nephrology: Where Do We Stand and Where Do We Go from Here? Mapping Out the Evidence in a Scoping Review.

Prognostic models can strongly support individualized care provision and well-informed shared decision making. There has been an upsurge of prognostic research in the field of nephrology, but the uptake of prognostic models in clinical practice remains limited. Therefore, we map out the research field of prognostic models for kidney patients and provide directions on how to proceed from here. We performed a scoping review of studies developing, validating, or updating a prognostic model for patients with CKD. We searched all published models in PubMed and Embase and report predicted outcomes, methodological quality, and validation and/or updating efforts. We found 602 studies, of which 30.1% concerned CKD populations, 31.6% dialysis populations, and 38.4% kidney transplantation populations. The most frequently predicted outcomes were mortality ( n =129), kidney disease progression ( n =75), and kidney graft survival ( n =54). Most studies provided discrimination measures (80.4%), but much less showed calibration results (43.4%). Of the 415 development studies, 28.0% did not perform any validation and 57.6% performed only internal validation. Moreover, only 111 models (26.7%) were externally validated either in the development study itself or in an independent external validation study. Finally, in 45.8% of development studies no useable version of the model was reported. To conclude, many prognostic models have been developed for patients with CKD, mainly for outcomes related to kidney disease progression and patient/graft survival. To bridge the gap between prediction research and kidney patient care, patient-reported outcomes, methodological rigor, complete reporting of prognostic models, external validation, updating, and impact assessment urgently need more attention.

A tool to predict the risk of lower extremity amputation in patients starting dialysis.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Non-traumatic lower extremity amputation (LEA) is a severe complication during dialysis. To inform decision-making for physicians, we developed a multivariable prediction model for LEA after starting dialysis. METHODS: Data from the Swedish Renal Registry (SNR) between 2010 and 2020 were geographically split into a development and validation cohort. Data from NECOSAD between 1997 and 2009 were used for validation targeted at Dutch patients. Inclusion criteria were no previous LEA and kidney transplant and age ≥ 40 years at baseline. A Fine-Gray model was developed with LEA within 3 years after starting dialysis as outcome of interest. Death and kidney transplant were treated as competing events. One coefficient, ordered by expected relevance, per 20 events was estimated. Performance was assessed with calibration and discrimination. RESULTS: SNR was split into an urban development cohort with 4 771 individuals experiencing 201 (4.8%) events and a rural validation cohort with 4.876 individuals experiencing 155 (3.2%) events. NECOSAD contained 1 658 individuals experiencing 61 (3.7%) events. Ten predictors were included: female sex, age, diabetes mellitus, peripheral artery disease, cardiovascular disease, congestive heart failure, obesity, albumin, haemoglobin and diabetic retinopathy. In SNR, calibration intercept and slope were -0.003 and 0.912 respectively. The C-index was estimated as 0.813 (0.783-0.843). In NECOSAD, calibration intercept and slope were 0.001 and 1.142 respectively. The C-index was estimated as 0.760 (0.697-0.824). Calibration plots showed good calibration. CONCLUSION: A newly developed model to predict LEA after starting dialysis showed good discriminatory performance and calibration. By identifying high-risk individuals this model could help select patients for preventive measures.

Clinical impact of the Kidney Failure Risk Equation for vascular access planning.

BACKGROUND: Risk-based thresholds for arteriovenous (AV) access creation has been proposed to aid vascular access planning. We aimed to assess the clinical impact of implementing the kidney failure risk equation (KFRE) for vascular access referral. METHODS: 16,102 nephrology-referred chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients from the Swedish Renal Registry 2008-2018 were included. The KFRE was calculated repeatedly, and the timing was identified for when the KFRE risk exceeded several pre-defined thresholds and/or the estimated glomerular filtration rate <15 ml/min/1.73m2 (eGFR15). To assess the utility of the KFRE/eGFR thresholds, cumulative incidence curves of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) or death, and decision-curve analyses were computed at 6, 12 months, and 2 years. The potential impact of using the different thresholds was illustrated by an example from the Swedish access registry. RESULTS: The 12-month specificity for KRT initiation was highest for KFRE>50% 94.5 (95% Confidence interval [CI] 94.3-94.7), followed by KFRE>40% 90.0 (95% CI 89.7-90.3), while sensitivity was highest for KFRE>30% 79.3 (95% CI 78.2-80.3) and eGFR<15 ml/min/1.73m2 81.2 (95% CI 80.2-82.2). The 2-year positive predictive value was 71.5 (95% CI 70.2-72.8), 61.7 (95% CI 60.4-63.0) and 47.2 (95% CI 46.1-48.3) for KFRE>50%, KFRE>40%, and eGFR<15 respectively. Decision curve analyses suggested the largest net benefit for KFRE>40% over two years and KFRE>50% over 12 months when it is important to avoid the harm of possibly unnecessary surgery. In Sweden, 54% of nephrology-referred patients started hemodialysis in a central venous catheter (CVC) of which only 5% had AV access surgery >6 months before initiation. 60% of the CVC patients exceeded KFRE>40% a median of 0.8 years (interquartile range 0.4-1.5) before KRT initiation. CONCLUSIONS: The utility of using KFRE>40% and KFRE>50% is higher compared to the more traditionally used eGFR threshold <15 ml/min/1.73m2 for vascular access planning.

Estimating skills level in recreational skiing: Development and validation of a practical multidimensional instrument.

Skiing and snowboarding are both popular recreational alpine sports, with substantial injury risk of variable severity. Although skills level has repeatedly been associated with injury risk, a validated measure to accurately estimate the actual skills level without objective assessment is missing. This study aimed to develop a practical validated instrument, to better estimate the actual skills level of recreational skiers, based on the criteria of the Dutch Skiing Federation (DSF), and covering five different skill domains. A sample of Dutch recreational skiers (n = 84) was asked to fill in a questionnaire reflecting seven, a priori chosen predictors by expert opinion, to ski downhill and to be objectively evaluated by expert assessors. The instrument was developed to have a multidimensional character and was validated according to the TRIPOD guideline (Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis). The sample reported an overall incorrect self-reported estimation of their skills, compared with the observed skill score. The instrument showed good calibration and underwent multiple validation methods. The estimated skills score showed to be closer to the observed scores, than self-reportage. Our study provides a practical, multidimensional, and validated instrument to estimate the actual skills level. It proved to better reflect the actual skills levels compared with self-reportage among recreational skiers.

Level of Overestimation Among Dutch Recreational Skiers: Unskilled Tourists in the Mountains.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the level of overestimation (LO), associated factors, and identify the group of severe overestimators, among recreational skiers. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: An intermediate difficulty slope in an artificial snow indoor ski hall, and one in the mountains (Flachau, Austria). PARTICIPANTS: Dutch recreational skiers. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES: Participants were asked to rate themselves (SRSS, self-reported skill score). While skiing downhill they were objectively evaluated by 2 expert assessors (OSS, observed skill score). Potential associated factors and predictors for severe overestimation were assessed by a questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The LO, calculated by subtracting the OSS from the SRSS, was categorized into "no," "mild," and "severe." Potential differences between these groups were analyzed, and regression analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with severe overestimation. To construct a profile of severe overestimators, the dataset was stratified based on 3 variables. RESULTS: Overestimation was largely present (79.8%), and was severe in 32%. The LO decreased toward the more skilled skiers. Severe overestimators were mainly male, skied the least hours per day, were more avoidant, and showed the highest proportions of beginners and slightly advanced skiers. The profile of "severe overestimator" is characterized by physically unprepared males, avoidant for certain weather circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Overestimation among recreational Dutch skiers is largely present, particularly among physically unprepared males, avoidant of certain snow and weather conditions. These features may function as a proxy to identify "severe overestimators" in comparable populations. Preventive strategies should focus to increase awareness particularly among these subjects.

Comprehensive comparison of stroke risk score performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis among 6 267 728 patients with atrial fibrillation.

AIMS: Multiple risk scores to predict ischaemic stroke (IS) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) have been developed. This study aims to systematically review these scores, their validations and updates, assess their methodological quality, and calculate pooled estimates of the predictive performance. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched PubMed and Web of Science for studies developing, validating, or updating risk scores for IS in AF patients. Methodological quality was assessed using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). To assess discrimination, pooled c-statistics were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. We identified 19 scores, which were validated and updated once or more in 70 and 40 studies, respectively, including 329 validations and 76 updates-nearly all on the CHA2DS2-VASc and CHADS2. Pooled c-statistics were calculated among 6 267 728 patients and 359 373 events of IS. For the CHA2DS2-VASc and CHADS2, pooled c-statistics were 0.644 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.635-0.653] and 0.658 (0.644-0.672), respectively. Better discriminatory abilities were found in the newer risk scores, with the modified-CHADS2 demonstrating the best discrimination [c-statistic 0.715 (0.674-0.754)]. Updates were found for the CHA2DS2-VASc and CHADS2 only, showing improved discrimination. Calibration was reasonable but available for only 17 studies. The PROBAST indicated a risk of methodological bias in all studies. CONCLUSION: Nineteen risk scores and 76 updates are available to predict IS in patients with AF. The guideline-endorsed CHA2DS2-VASc shows inferior discriminative abilities compared with newer scores. Additional external validations and data on calibration are required before considering the newer scores in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ID CRD4202161247 (PROSPERO).

Stopping Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced CKD and Risk of Adverse Outcomes: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether stopping renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor therapy in patients with advanced CKD affects outcomes. METHODS: We studied patients referred to nephrologist care, listed on the Swedish Renal Registry during 2007-2017, who developed advanced CKD (eGFR<30 ml/min per 1.73 m2) while on RAS inhibitor therapy. Using target trial emulation techniques on the basis of cloning, censoring, and weighting, we compared the risks of stopping within 6 months and remaining off treatment versus continuing RAS inhibitor therapy. These included risks of subsequent 5-year all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and initiation of kidney replacement therapy (KRT). RESULTS: Of 10,254 prevalent RAS inhibitor users (median age 72 years, 36% female) with new-onset eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2, 1553 (15%) stopped RAS inhibitor therapy within 6 months. Median eGFR was 23 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Compared with continuing RAS inhibition, stopping this therapy was associated with a higher absolute 5-year risk of death (40.9% versus 54.5%) and major adverse cardiovascular events (47.6% versus 59.5%), but with a lower risk of KRT (36.1% versus 27.9%); these corresponded to absolute risk differences of 13.6 events per 100 patients, 11.9 events per 100 patients, and -8.3 events per 100 patients, respectively. Results were consistent whether patients stopped RAS inhibition at higher or lower eGFR, across prespecified subgroups, after adjustment and stratification for albuminuria and potassium, and when modeling RAS inhibition as a time-dependent exposure using a marginal structural model. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide observational study of people with advanced CKD, stopping RAS inhibition was associated with higher absolute risks of mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events, but also with a lower absolute risk of initiating KRT.

Kidney Failure Prediction Models: A Comprehensive External Validation Study in Patients with Advanced CKD.

BACKGROUND: Various prediction models have been developed to predict the risk of kidney failure in patients with CKD. However, guideline-recommended models have yet to be compared head to head, their validation in patients with advanced CKD is lacking, and most do not account for competing risks. METHODS: To externally validate 11 existing models of kidney failure, taking the competing risk of death into account, we included patients with advanced CKD from two large cohorts: the European Quality Study (EQUAL), an ongoing European prospective, multicenter cohort study of older patients with advanced CKD, and the Swedish Renal Registry (SRR), an ongoing registry of nephrology-referred patients with CKD in Sweden. The outcome of the models was kidney failure (defined as RRT-treated ESKD). We assessed model performance with discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: The study included 1580 patients from EQUAL and 13,489 patients from SRR. The average c statistic over the 11 validated models was 0.74 in EQUAL and 0.80 in SRR, compared with 0.89 in previous validations. Most models with longer prediction horizons overestimated the risk of kidney failure considerably. The 5-year Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) overpredicted risk by 10%-18%. The four- and eight-variable 2-year KFRE and the 4-year Grams model showed excellent calibration and good discrimination in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Some existing models can accurately predict kidney failure in patients with advanced CKD. KFRE performed well for a shorter time frame (2 years), despite not accounting for competing events. Models predicting over a longer time frame (5 years) overestimated risk because of the competing risk of death. The Grams model, which accounts for the latter, is suitable for longer-term predictions (4 years).

Validation of risk scores for ischaemic stroke in atrial fibrillation across the spectrum of kidney function.

AIMS: The increasing prevalence of ischaemic stroke (IS) can partly be explained by the likewise growing number of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Risk scores have been developed to identify high-risk patients, allowing for personalized anticoagulation therapy. However, predictive performance in CKD is unclear. The aim of this study is to validate six commonly used risk scores for IS in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients across the spectrum of kidney function. METHODS AND RESULTS: Overall, 36 004 subjects with newly diagnosed AF from SCREAM (Stockholm CREAtinine Measurements), a healthcare utilization cohort of Stockholm residents, were included. Predictive performance of the AFI, CHADS2, Modified CHADS2, CHA2DS2-VASc, ATRIA, and GARFIELD-AF risk scores was evaluated across three strata of kidney function: normal kidney function [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >60 mL/min/1.73 m2], mild CKD (eGFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m2), and advanced CKD (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Predictive performance was assessed by discrimination and calibration. During 1.9 years, 3069 (8.5%) patients suffered an IS. Discrimination was dependent on eGFR: the median c-statistic in normal eGFR was 0.75 (range 0.68-0.78), but decreased to 0.68 (0.58-0.73) and 0.68 (0.55-0.74) for mild and advanced CKD, respectively. Calibration was reasonable and largely independent of eGFR. The Modified CHADS2 score showed good performance across kidney function strata, both for discrimination [c-statistic: 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.77-0.79), 0.73 (0.71-0.74) and 0.74 (0.69-0.79), respectively] and calibration. CONCLUSION: In the most clinically relevant stages of CKD, predictive performance of the majority of risk scores was poor, increasing the risk of misclassification and thus of over- or undertreatment. The Modified CHADS2 score performed good and consistently across all kidney function strata, and should therefore be preferred for risk estimation in AF patients.

Comparative Effectiveness of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Calcium Channel Blockers in Individuals With Advanced CKD: A Nationwide Observational Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: It is unknown whether initiating renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor therapy in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) is superior to alternative antihypertensive agents such as calcium channel blockers (CCBs). We compared the risks for kidney replacement therapy (KRT), mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with advanced CKD in routine nephrology practice who were initiating either RAS inhibitor or CCB therapy. STUDY DESIGN: Observational study in the Swedish Renal Registry, 2007 to 2017. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: 2,458 new users of RAS inhibitors and 2,345 CCB users with estimated glomerular filtration rates<30mL/min/1.73m2 (CKD G4-G5 without KRT) who were being followed up by a nephrologist. As a positive control cohort, new users of the same drugs with CKD G3 (estimated glomerular filtration rate, 30-60mL/min/1.73m2) were evaluated. EXPOSURES: RAS inhibitor versus CCB therapy initiation. OUTCOME: Initiation of KRT (maintenance dialysis or transplantation), all-cause mortality, and MACE (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: HRs with 95% CIs were estimated using propensity score-weighted Cox proportional hazards regression adjusting for demographic, clinical, and laboratory covariates. RESULTS: Median age was 74 years, 38% were women, and median follow-up was 4.1 years. After propensity score weighting, there was significantly lower risk for KRT after new use of RAS inhibitors compared with new use of CCBs (adjusted HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69-0.89]) but similar risks for mortality (adjusted HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.88-1.07]) and MACE (adjusted HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.88-1.15]). Results were consistent across subgroups and in as-treated analyses. The positive control cohort of patients with CKD G3 showed similar KRT risk reduction (adjusted HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.80]) with RAS inhibitor therapy compared with CCBs. LIMITATIONS: Potential confounding by indication. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide evidence from real-world clinical practice that initiation of RAS inhibitor therapy compared with CCBs may confer kidney benefits among patients with advanced CKD, with similar cardiovascular protection.

Kidney function and symptom development over time in elderly patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: results of the EQUAL cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Initiation of renal replacement therapy often results from a combination of kidney function deterioration and symptoms related to chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression. We investigated the association between kidney function decline and symptom development in patients with advanced CKD. METHODS: In the European Quality study on treatment in advanced CKD (EQUAL study), a European prospective cohort study, patients with advanced CKD aged ≥65 years and a kidney function that dropped <20 mL/min/1.73 m2 were followed for 1 year. Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the association between kidney function decline and symptom development. The sum score for symptom number ranged from 0 to 33 and for overall symptom severity from 0 to 165, using the Dialysis Symptom Index. RESULTS: At least one kidney function estimate with symptom number or overall symptom severity was available for 1109 and 1019 patients, respectively. The mean (95% confidence interval) annual kidney function decline was 1.70 (1.32; 2.08) mL/min/1.73 m2. The mean overall increase in symptom number and severity was 0.73 (0.28; 1.19) and 2.93 (1.34; 4.52) per year, respectively. A cross-sectional association between the level of kidney function and symptoms was lacking. Furthermore, kidney function at cohort entry was not associated with symptom development. However, each mL/min/1.73 m2 of annual kidney function decline was associated with an extra annual increase of 0.23 (0.07; 0.39) in the number of symptoms and 0.87 (0.35; 1.40) in overall symptom severity. CONCLUSIONS: A faster kidney function decline was associated with a steeper increase in both symptom number and severity. Considering the modest association, our results seem to suggest that repeated thorough assessment of symptom development during outpatient clinic visits, in addition to the monitoring of kidney function decline, is important for clinical decision-making.

Bleeding risk of haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Dialysis patients have an increased bleeding risk as compared with the general population. However, there is limited information whether bleeding risks are different for patients treated with haemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD). From a clinical point of view, this information could influence therapy choice. Therefore the aim of this study was to investigate the association between dialysis modality and bleeding risk. METHODS: Incident dialysis patients from the Netherlands Cooperative Study on the Adequacy of Dialysis were prospectively followed for major bleeding events over 3 years. Hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for HD compared with PD using a time-dependent Cox regression analysis, with updates on dialysis modality. RESULTS: In total, 1745 patients started dialysis, of whom 1211 (69.4%) received HD and 534 (30.6%) PD. The bleeding rate was 60.8/1000 person-years for HD patients and 34.6/1000 person-years for PD patients. The time-dependent Cox regression analysis showed that after adjustment for age, sex, primary kidney disease, prior bleeding, cardiovascular disease, antiplatelet drug use, vitamin K antagonist use, erythropoietin use, arterial hypertension, residual glomerular filtratin rate, haemoglobin and albumin levels, bleeding risk for HD patients compared with PD increased 1.5-fold (95% CI 1.0-2.2). CONCLUSIONS: In this large prospective cohort of incident dialysis patients, HD patients had an increased bleeding risk compared with PD patients. In particular, HD patients with a history of prior bleeding had an increased bleeding risk.

Prediction or causality? A scoping review of their conflation within current observational research.

Etiological research aims to uncover causal effects, whilst prediction research aims to forecast an outcome with the best accuracy. Causal and prediction research usually require different methods, and yet their findings may get conflated when reported and interpreted. The aim of the current study is to quantify the frequency of conflation between etiological and prediction research, to discuss common underlying mistakes and provide recommendations on how to avoid these. Observational cohort studies published in January 2018 in the top-ranked journals of six distinct medical fields (Cardiology, Clinical Epidemiology, Clinical Neurology, General and Internal Medicine, Nephrology and Surgery) were included for the current scoping review. Data on conflation was extracted through signaling questions. In total, 180 studies were included. Overall, 26% (n = 46) contained conflation between etiology and prediction. The frequency of conflation varied across medical field and journal impact factor. From the causal studies 22% was conflated, mainly due to the selection of covariates based on their ability to predict without taking the causal structure into account. Within prediction studies 38% was conflated, the most frequent reason was a causal interpretation of covariates included in a prediction model. Conflation of etiology and prediction is a common methodological error in observational medical research and more frequent in prediction studies. As this may lead to biased estimations and erroneous conclusions, researchers must be careful when designing, interpreting and disseminating their research to ensure this conflation is avoided.

Appraising prediction research: a guide and meta-review on bias and applicability assessment using the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST).

Over the past few years, a large number of prediction models have been published, often of poor methodological quality. Seemingly objective and straightforward, prediction models provide a risk estimate for the outcome of interest, usually based on readily available clinical information. Yet, using models of substandard methodological rigour, especially without external validation, may result in incorrect risk estimates and consequently misclassification. To assess and combat bias in prediction research the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST) was published in 2019. This risk of bias (ROB) tool includes four domains and 20 signalling questions highlighting methodological flaws, and provides guidance in assessing the applicability of the model. In this paper, the PROBAST will be discussed, along with an in-depth review of two commonly encountered pitfalls in prediction modelling that may induce bias: overfitting and composite endpoints. We illustrate the prevalence of potential bias in prediction models with a meta-review of 50 systematic reviews that used the PROBAST to appraise their included studies, thus including 1510 different studies on 2104 prediction models. All domains showed an unclear or high ROB; these results were markedly stable over time, highlighting the urgent need for attention on bias in prediction research. This article aims to do just that by providing (1) the clinician with tools to evaluate the (methodological) quality of a clinical prediction model, (2) the researcher working on a review with methods to appraise the included models, and (3) the researcher developing a model with suggestions to improve model quality.

Person centred care provision and care planning in chronic kidney disease: which outcomes matter? A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies : Care planning in CKD: which outcomes matter?

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Explore priorities related to outcomes and barriers of adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) regarding person centred care and care planning. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of qualitative studies. SEARCH STRATEGY & SOURCES: In July 2018 six bibliographic databases, and reference lists of included articles were searched for qualitative studies that included adults with CKD stages 1-5, not on dialysis or conservative management, without a previous kidney transplantation. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Three independent reviewers extracted and inductively coded data using thematic synthesis. Reporting quality was assessed using the COREQ and the review reported according to PRISMA and ENTREQ statements. RESULTS: Forty-six studies involving 1493 participants were eligible. The period after diagnosis of CKD is characterized by feelings of uncertainty, social isolation, financial burden, resentment and fear of the unknown. Patients show interest in ways to return to normality and remain in control of their health in order to avoid further deterioration of kidney function. However, necessary information is often unavailable or incomprehensible. Although patients and healthcare professionals share the predominant interest of whether or not dialysis or transplantation is necessary, patients value many more outcomes that are often unrecognized by their healthcare professionals. We identified 4 themes with 6 subthemes that summarize these findings: 'pursuing normality and control' ('pursuing normality'; 'a search for knowledge'); 'prioritizing outcomes' ('reaching kidney failure'; 'experienced health'; 'social life'; 'work and economic productivity'); 'predicting the future'; and 'realising what matters'. Reporting quality was moderate for most included studies. LIMITATIONS: Exclusion of non-English articles. CONCLUSIONS: The realisation that patients' priorities do not match those of the healthcare professionals, in combination with the prognostic ambiguity, confirms fatalistic perceptions of not being in control when living with CKD. These insights may contribute to greater understanding of patients' perspectives and a more person-centred approach in healthcare prioritization and care planning within CKD care.

DIALysis or not: Outcomes in older kidney patients with GerIatriC Assessment (DIALOGICA): rationale and design.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and prevalence of older patients with kidney failure who are dependent on dialysis is increasing. However, observational studies showed limited or no benefit of dialysis on mortality in subgroups of these patients when compared to conservative care. As the focus is shifting towards health-related quality of life (HRQoL), current evidence of effects of conservative care or dialysis on HRQoL in older patients is both limited and biased. Dialysis comes with both high treatment burden for patients and high costs for society; better identification of patients who might not benefit from dialysis could result in significant cost savings. The aim of this prospective study is to compare HRQoL, clinical outcomes, and costs between conservative care and dialysis in older patients. METHODS: The DIALysis or not: Outcomes in older kidney patients with GerIatriC Assessment (DIALOGICA) study is a prospective, observational cohort study that started in February 2020. It aims to include 1500 patients from 25 Dutch and Belgian centres. Patients aged ≥70 years with an eGFR of 10-15 mL/min/1.73m2 are enrolled in the first stage of the study. When dialysis is initiated or eGFR drops to 10 mL/min/1.73m2 or lower, the second stage of the study commences. In both stages nephrogeriatric assessments will be performed annually, consisting of questionnaires and tests to assess most common geriatric domains, i.e. functional, psychological, somatic, and social status. The primary outcome is HRQoL, measured with the Twelve-item Short-Form Health Survey. Secondary outcomes are clinical outcomes (mortality, hospitalisation, functional status, cognitive functioning, frailty), cost-effectiveness, and decisional regret. All outcomes are (repeated) measures during the first year of the second stage. The total follow-up will be a maximum of 4 years with a minimum of 1 year in the second stage. DISCUSSION: By generating more insight in the effects of conservative care and dialysis on HRQoL, clinical outcomes, and costs, findings of this study will help patients and physicians make a shared decision on the best individual treatment option for kidney failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register ( NL-8352 ) on 5 February 2020.

Academic Success Experiences: Promoting Research Motivation andSelf-Efficacy Beliefs among Medical Students.

THEORY: Medicine is facing a physician-scientist shortage. Medical training could contribute to developing physician-scientists by stimulating student research involvement, as previous studies showed this is related to research involvement in professional practice. Motivation for research and research self-efficacy beliefs are related to student research involvement. Based on social cognitive theory, success experiences in doing research may enhance research motivation and self-efficacy beliefs. However, the role and type of success experiences in promoting research self-efficacy beliefs and motivation especially early in medical training has not yet been investigated. Therefore, we examined if academic success experiences within an undergraduate course in academic and scientific skills increased research motivation and self-efficacy beliefs among medical students. Furthermore, type of success experience was taken into account by looking at the effects of academic success experiences within standard (i.e., exam) versus authentic (i.e., research report and oral presentation) assessments. HYPOTHESES: It was hypothesized that academic success experiences increase intrinsic motivation for research and self-efficacy beliefs. Furthermore, we hypothesized that authentic assessments influence intrinsic motivation for research and self-efficacy beliefs to a larger degree than standard assessments, as the authentic assessments mirror real-world practices of researchers. METHOD: First-year undergraduate medicine students followed a course in academic and scientific skills in which they conducted research individually. Their academic success experiences were operationalized as their grades on two authentic research assessments (written report and oral presentation) and one less authentic assessment (written exam). We surveyed students before the course when entering medical school (i.e., baseline measure) and 1 year after the course in their 2nd year (i.e., postmeasure). Both the baseline and postmeasure surveys measured intrinsic motivation for research, extrinsic motivation for research, and research self-efficacy beliefs. Linear regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between academic success experiences and intrinsic motivation for research, extrinsic motivation for research, and research self-efficacy beliefs on the postmeasure. We adjusted for prior research motivation and self-efficacy beliefs at baseline. Therefore, this adjusted effect can be interpreted as an increase or decrease in motivation. In addition, we adjusted for age, gender, and grade point average (GPA) of the first 4 months, as these variables were seen as possible confounders. RESULTS: In total, 243 of 275 students participated (88.4%). Academic success experiences in writing and presenting research were related to a significant increase in intrinsic motivation for research. After adjusting for prior GPA, only the effect of presenting remained. Experiencing success in presenting enhanced research self-efficacy beliefs, also after adjusting for prior GPA. Higher grades on the exam did not affect intrinsic motivation for research or research self-efficacy significantly. Also, none of the success experiences influenced extrinsic motivation for research. CONCLUSIONS: Academic success experiences on authentic research tasks, especially presenting research, may be a good way to enhance intrinsic motivation for research and research self-efficacy beliefs. In turn, research motivation and self-efficacy beliefs promote research involvement, which is a first step in the physician-scientist pipeline. Furthermore, this study established the applicability of the social cognitive theory in a research context within the medical domain.

Stopping renin-angiotensin system blockers after acute kidney injury and risk of adverse outcomes: parallel population-based cohort studies in English and Swedish routine care.

BACKGROUND: The safety of restarting angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) after acute kidney injury (AKI) is unclear. There is concern that previous users do not restart ACEI/ARB despite ongoing indications. We sought to determine the risk of adverse events after an episode of AKI, comparing prior ACEI/ARB users who stop treatment to those who continue. METHODS: We conducted two parallel cohort studies in English and Swedish primary and secondary care, 2006-2016. We used multivariable Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for hospital admission with heart failure (primary analysis), AKI, stroke, or death within 2 years after hospital discharge following a first AKI episode. We compared risks of admission between people who stopped ACEI/ARB treatment to those who were prescribed ACEI/ARB within 30 days of AKI discharge. We undertook sensitivity analyses, including propensity score-matched samples, to explore the robustness of our results. RESULTS: In England, we included 7303 people with AKI hospitalisation following recent ACEI/ARB therapy for the primary analysis. Four thousand three (55%) were classified as stopping ACEI/ARB based on no prescription within 30 days of discharge. In Sweden, we included 1790 people, of whom 1235 (69%) stopped treatment. In England, no differences were seen in subsequent risk of heart failure (HR 1.10; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.93-1.30), AKI (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.77-1.05), or stroke (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.71-1.38), but there was an increased risk of death (HR 1.27; 95% CI 1.15-1.41) in those who stopped ACEI/ARB compared to those who continued. Results were similar in Sweden: no differences were seen in risk of heart failure (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.73-1.13) or AKI (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.54-1.21). However, no increased risk of death was seen (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.78-1.13) and stroke was less common in people who stopped ACEI/ARB (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34-0.93). Results were similar across all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Previous ACEI/ARB users who continued treatment after an episode of AKI did not have an increased risk of heart failure or subsequent AKI compared to those who stopped the drugs.

Towards the best kidney failure prediction tool: a systematic review and selection aid.

BACKGROUND: Prediction tools that identify chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients at a high risk of developing kidney failure have the potential for great clinical value, but limited uptake. The aim of the current study is to systematically review all available models predicting kidney failure in CKD patients, organize empirical evidence on their validity and ultimately provide guidance in the interpretation and uptake of these tools. METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant articles. Titles, abstracts and full-text articles were sequentially screened for inclusion by two independent researchers. Data on study design, model development and performance were extracted. The risk of bias and clinical usefulness were assessed and combined in order to provide recommendations on which models to use. RESULTS: Of 2183 screened studies, a total of 42 studies were included in the current review. Most studies showed high discriminatory capacity and the included predictors had large overlap. Overall, the risk of bias was high. Slightly less than half the studies (48%) presented enough detail for the use of their prediction tool in practice and few models were externally validated. CONCLUSIONS: The current systematic review may be used as a tool to select the most appropriate and robust prognostic model for various settings. Although some models showed great potential, many lacked clinical relevance due to being developed in a prevalent patient population with a wide range of disease severity. Future research efforts should focus on external validation and impact assessment in clinically relevant patient populations.

Prediction meets causal inference: the role of treatment in clinical prediction models.

In this paper we study approaches for dealing with treatment when developing a clinical prediction model. Analogous to the estimand framework recently proposed by the European Medicines Agency for clinical trials, we propose a 'predictimand' framework of different questions that may be of interest when predicting risk in relation to treatment started after baseline. We provide a formal definition of the estimands matching these questions, give examples of settings in which each is useful and discuss appropriate estimators including their assumptions. We illustrate the impact of the predictimand choice in a dataset of patients with end-stage kidney disease. We argue that clearly defining the estimand is equally important in prediction research as in causal inference.