Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.


Disparities between trial cohorts and real-life patients

A new study reports important differences between the characteristics of patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis who are enrolled in clinical trials worldwide and the general US dialysis population. These findings highlight the importance of including older patients and those with comorbidities in clinical trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it


Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout


  1. Ioannisis, J. P. Why most published research findings are false. PLOS Med. 2, e124 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Guyatt, G. et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 64, 383–394 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Smyth, B. et al. Representativeness of randomised clinical trial cohorts in end-stage kidney disease. A meta-analysis. JAMA Intern. Med. (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. United States Renal Data System. Annual report 2018. Volume 2: End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States. 2018 ADR Reference Tables. USRDS (2018).

  5. Lozier, M. R. et al. Comparison of cardiovascular outcomes by dialysis modality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Perit. Dial. Int. 39, 306–314 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Stirnadel-Farrant, H. A. et al. Cardiovascular event rates among hemodialysis patients across geographical regions - a snapshot from the dialysis outcomes and practice patterns study (DOPPS). Kidney Int. Rep. 4, 864–872 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Iyasere, O. et al. Longitudinal trends in quality of life and physical function in frail older dialysis patients: a comparison of assisted peritoneal dialysis and in-center hemodialysis. Perit. Dial. Int. 39, 112–118 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ioannisis, J. P. How to make more published research true. PLOS Med. 11, e1001747 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. World Health Organization. Use of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Abbreviated report of a WHO consultation 2011. WHO (2011).

  10. Peters, S. A. et al. Haemodiafiltration and mortality in end-stage kidney disease patients: a pooled individual participant data analysis from four randomized controlled trials. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 31, 978–984 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew Davenport.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Davenport, A. Disparities between trial cohorts and real-life patients. Nat Rev Nephrol 15, 666–667 (2019).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing