Extension usage examples:
Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Article summary:
1. This multicentric study aimed to identify prevalence and determinants of severity of uremic pruritus among Egyptian patients.
2. Independent predictors of uremic pruritus included associated hypertension, higher calcium levels, higher phosphorus levels, and higher high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels.
3. Independent predictors of significant uremic pruritus included longer hemodialysis duration, lack of vitamin D supplementation, lower albumin levels, and higher hsCRP levels.
Article analysis:
The article “Prevalence and determinants of severity of uremic pruritus in hemodialysis patients: a multicentric study” by Amany M Abdallah et al., is a well-written article that provides an overview on the prevalence and determinants of severity of uremic pruritus among Egyptian patients on hemodialysis. The authors have conducted a cross-sectional study at 5 HD units with 295 adult patients on maintenance HD to assess the prevalence and determinants of UP severity. The authors have used appropriate statistical methods such as Fisher’s exact test, χ2 test, Mann-Whitney U test, or t-test as appropriate to compare variables between groups and binary logistic regression was used to identify predictors of certain outcome.
The article is generally trustworthy and reliable as it provides detailed information about the methodology used in the study including the sample size, data collection methods, statistical analysis techniques etc., which makes it easier for readers to evaluate its trustworthiness and reliability. However, there are some potential biases that should be noted such as selection bias due to the small sample size used in the study which may not be representative of all Egyptian HD patients; lack of control group; lack of blinding; possible confounding factors such as age or gender that were not taken into account; limited generalizability due to the multicentric nature of the study; and lack of follow up data which could provide more insight into long term effects.
In conclusion, this article is generally trustworthy and reliable but there are some potential biases that should be noted when evaluating its trustworthiness and reliability.