↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Dietary interventions for adults with chronic kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

3 policy sources
55 tweeters
6 Facebook pages
1 Google+ user


66 Dimensions

Readers on

462 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
Dietary interventions for adults with chronic kidney disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011998.pub2
Pubmed ID

Suetonia C Palmer, Jasjot K Maggo, Katrina L Campbell, Jonathan C Craig, David W Johnson, Bernadet Sutanto, Marinella Ruospo, Allison Tong, Giovanni FM Strippoli


Dietary changes are routinely recommended in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on the basis of randomised evidence in the general population and non-randomised studies in CKD that suggest certain healthy eating patterns may prevent cardiovascular events and lower mortality. People who have kidney disease have prioritised dietary modifications as an important treatment uncertainty. This review evaluated the benefits and harms of dietary interventions among adults with CKD including people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) treated with dialysis or kidney transplantation. We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register (up to 31 January 2017) through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised RCTs of dietary interventions versus other dietary interventions, lifestyle advice, or standard care assessing mortality, cardiovascular events, health-related quality of life, and biochemical, anthropomorphic, and nutritional outcomes among people with CKD. Two authors independently screened studies for inclusion and extracted data. Results were summarised as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes or mean differences (MD) or standardised MD (SMD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI) or in descriptive format when meta-analysis was not possible. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using GRADE. We included 17 studies involving 1639 people with CKD. Three studies enrolled 341 people treated with dialysis, four studies enrolled 168 kidney transplant recipients, and 10 studies enrolled 1130 people with CKD stages 1 to 5. Eleven studies (900 people) evaluated dietary counselling with or without lifestyle advice and six evaluated dietary patterns (739 people), including one study (191 people) of a carbohydrate-restricted low-iron, polyphenol enriched diet, two studies (181 people) of increased fruit and vegetable intake, two studies (355 people) of a Mediterranean diet and one study (12 people) of a high protein/low carbohydrate diet. Risks of bias in the included studies were generally high or unclear, lowering confidence in the results. Participants were followed up for a median of 12 months (range 1 to 46.8 months).Studies were not designed to examine all-cause mortality or cardiovascular events. In very-low quality evidence, dietary interventions had uncertain effects on all-cause mortality or ESKD. In absolute terms, dietary interventions may prevent one person in every 3000 treated for one year avoiding ESKD, although the certainty in this effect was very low. Across all 17 studies, outcome data for cardiovascular events were sparse. Dietary interventions in low quality evidence were associated with a higher health-related quality of life (2 studies, 119 people: MD in SF-36 score 11.46, 95% CI 7.73 to 15.18; I(2) = 0%). Adverse events were generally not reported.Dietary interventions lowered systolic blood pressure (3 studies, 167 people: MD -9.26 mm Hg, 95% CI -13.48 to -5.04; I(2) = 80%) and diastolic blood pressure (2 studies, 95 people: MD -8.95, 95% CI -10.69 to -7.21; I(2) = 0%) compared to a control diet. Dietary interventions were associated with a higher estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (5 studies, 219 people: SMD 1.08; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.97; I(2) = 88%) and serum albumin levels (6 studies, 541 people: MD 0.16 g/dL, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.24; I(2) = 26%). A Mediterranean diet lowered serum LDL cholesterol levels (1 study, 40 people: MD -1.00 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.56 to -0.44). Dietary interventions have uncertain effects on mortality, cardiovascular events and ESKD among people with CKD as these outcomes were rarely measured or reported. Dietary interventions may increase health-related quality of life, eGFR, and serum albumin, and lower blood pressure and serum cholesterol levels.Based on stakeholder prioritisation of dietary research in the setting of CKD and preliminary evidence of beneficial effects on risks factors for clinical outcomes, large-scale pragmatic RCTs to test the effects of dietary interventions on patient outcomes are required.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 462 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 461 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 86 19%
Student > Bachelor 78 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 8%
Researcher 36 8%
Other 32 7%
Other 84 18%
Unknown 109 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 152 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 99 21%
Social Sciences 15 3%
Psychology 14 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 3%
Other 49 11%
Unknown 120 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 18 May 2021.
All research outputs
of 17,795,994 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 11,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 274,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,795,994 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,771 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 274,216 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.