ライフサイエンスコーパス: nephrologist

1 tions of HNF1beta-associated disease for the nephrologist.

2 prescribed unless the patient had visited a nephrologist.

3 mortality, is the timing of referral to the nephrologist.

4 n, and by at least one outpatient visit to a nephrologist.

5 agnosis relies on the clinical acumen of the nephrologist.

6 mmendation for renal transplantation by U.S. nephrologists.

7 onded, including 191 adult and 125 pediatric nephrologists.

8 creasing pressures to decrease the number of nephrologists.

9 risk of readmissions tended to be lower for nephrologists.

10 genesis than current treatments available to nephrologists.

11 ts need to target patients, generalists, and nephrologists.

12 an advance directive than German or Japanese nephrologists.

13 7 to 3.3]) and were more likely to consult a nephrologist (absolute risk difference, 0.15% [CI, 0.01%

14 ive educational resources are needed to help nephrologists advocate for disadvantaged patients and ad

15 Nephrologists also stated whether they would continue or

16 d all-cause mortality hazard ratios for each nephrologist and compared patient- and provider-level ch

17 In particular, delayed referral to the nephrologist and lack of permanent vascular access were

18 Greater attention to timely referral to the nephrologist and timely placement of vascular access cou

19 ICC among all physicians was 0.64 (0.62 for nephrologists and 0.67 for rheumatologists).

20 Seven nephrologists and 22 rheumatologists completed the ratin

21 Seven nephrologists and 22 rheumatologists rated each scenario

22 patients with lupus nephritis were sent to 8 nephrologists and 29 rheumatologists for rating.

23 The risk of readmission was 24% for nephrologists and 30% for internists (P = 0.328).

24 During DRIVE-II, treating nephrologists and anemia managers adjusted doses of epoe

25 Adult and pediatric nephrologists and geneticists from four continents whose

26 Familiar to nephrologists and hematologists alike, classically assoc

27 The nephrologists and oncologists will have to work together

28 y improved outcomes for blacks may encourage nephrologists and patients to aggressively promote acces

29 ologic correlation on the part of transplant nephrologists and renal pathologists are required to rec

30 ients were compared with services covered by nephrologists and services covered by internists.

31 ite recipient race, referral by a transplant nephrologist, and employed status.

32 ischemic heart disease, late referral to the nephrologist, and use of temporary vascular access for t

33 German and Japanese nephrologists appear willing to follow advance directive

34 Nephrologists are frequently called on to diagnose and t

35 he 45 patients were diagnosed by a pediatric nephrologist as having renal dysfunction that suggested

36 indicate that rheumatologists as a group and nephrologists as a group have equal agreement in their r

37 t whether a given patient had been seen by a nephrologist at 90 d before first dialysis.

38 education, and to compare practices between nephrologists at for-profit and nonprofit centers.

39 We aimed to characterize nephrologists' attitudes regarding kidney transplant edu

40 We aimed to describe nephrologists' attitudes to patients' access to kidney t

41 This study aims to describe nephrologists' attitudes towards recipient eligibility a

42 Most important, nephrologists await development of tools to predict reli

43 In this context, it is imperative that nephrologists become familiar with this literature, revi

44 Delayed referral of renal patients to a nephrologist before RRT is significantly associated with

45 e were less likely to be under the care of a nephrologist before the onset of ESRD (62.3% [95% confid

46 Such disparities may be in part explained by nephrologists' beliefs and decisions about recipient eli

47 10-59 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) who were referred to nephrologists between April 1, 2001, and December 31, 20

48 an claims on the timing of first predialysis nephrologist care.

49 ssential dialytic modality for the pediatric nephrologist caring for critically ill children.

50 Many nephrologists caring for patients with cancer in the Uni

51 Hence, these results suggest that nephrologist caseload influences hemodialysis patient ou

52 eview, therefore, is to address, for the non-nephrologist, clinically relevant topical questions rega

53 for hemodialysis patients under the care of nephrologists compared with internists.

54 ders about the timing of the patient's first nephrologist consultation before initiation of dialysis.

55 aims data, was the first observed outpatient nephrologist consultation; secondary analyses used the e

56 ay absolute increase in hospitalizations and nephrologist consultations.

57 ed, the care of hemodialysis patients by the nephrologist could diminish the overall expense of the E

58 Nephrologists' decisions about recipient suitability for

59 Only 5 children (4%) had been seen by a nephrologist during follow-up.

60 of rating the frequency at which they saw a nephrologist excellent (low: adjusted OR = 0.39, 95% CI,

61 CKD patients referred to a nephrologist for the first time within 90 d of the start

62 training is needed to better prepare future nephrologists for the growing challenges of kidney care.

63 conducted from June to October 2013 with 41 nephrologists from Australia and New Zealand.

64 However, almost all nephrologists from the 3 countries would stop dialysis w

65 In the cross-sectional survey, nurses and nephrologists from the United States (n = 49), Japan (n

66 Patients referred earlier to a nephrologist (> 4 mo versus < or =4 mo) and seen more fr

67 us < or =4 mo) and seen more frequently by a nephrologist (> or =2 visits versus < 2 visits) in the p

68 The nephrologist has two choices: restrict antiproteinuric t

69 s concern was that it is paradoxical that we nephrologists have focused on optimizing urea clearance

70 ntravenous iron supplementation has grown as nephrologists have gradually moved away from the liberal

71 For several decades, nephrologists have wondered whether proteinuria is a res

72 Currently, nephrologists, hematologist-oncologists, neurologists, a

73 In this article, the role of a nephrologist in a capitated environment is outlined in d

74 Patients often are not evaluated by nephrologists in a timely manner.

75 We surveyed nephrologists in four countries to determine whether eGF

76 ed by a multidisciplinary team of paediatric nephrologists, interventional radiologists, and vascular

77 In this manuscript, nephrologist-investigators from one of five Clinical Cen

78 absence of > or = 6 mo of pre-ESRD care by a nephrologist is associated with a higher risk for death.

79 of patients with chronic renal failure by a nephrologist is associated with greater burden and sever

80 It is concluded that late referral to the nephrologist is common in the United States and is assoc

81 The challenge to nephrologists is to provide treatment based on exacting

82 ost-effective delivery of care will occur as nephrologists join together to form Independent Practice

83 Renal pathologists and nephrologists met on February 20, 2015 to establish an e

84 thesis that late referral of patients to the nephrologist might lead to suboptimal pre-ESRD care.

85 Nephrologists might diagnose HNF1beta-associated kidney

86 specialized care for these complex patients, nephrologists must render less care for more patients, o

87 conducted with 53 transplant professionals (nephrologists [n = 21], surgeons/urologists [n = 17], co

88 Nephrologists need more information about assessing and

89 Dermatologists, oncologists, and nephrologists need to be aware of this potential hazard.

90 Nephrologists need to consider the possibility of this h

91 While nephrologists often observe reduced hematocrit associate

92 that patients seen more frequently by their nephrologist or advanced practitioner within the first 9

93 reported KTPI (in-person survey of whether a nephrologist or dialysis staff had discussed KT) in a pr

94 s at an academic institution by an attending nephrologist or fellow between June 1983 and June 2002.

95 considered adequate in case of referral to a nephrologist or if proteinuria, blood pressure, low-dens

96 The dialysis nephrologist or the potential transplant recipient is ex

97 mes on alternate days to services covered by nephrologists or by internists from July 1995 to March 1

98 Nephrologists, pathologists, and gastroenterology sub-sp

99 sy databases, dialysis/transplant databases, nephrologists' patients, clinic lists, and lupus patient

100 dialysis vs hemodialysis, compared based on nephrologists' pediatric experience.

101 Studies that assessed nephrologists' perspectives toward patient referral, scr

102 Six themes underpinned nephrologists' perspectives: prioritizing individual ben

103 We surveyed 906 nephrologist practicing in the United States.

104 proach to initiation in patients followed by nephrologists pre-ESRD.

105 We examined whether a higher patient-nephrologist ratio affects patient mortality risk using

106 ite recipient race, referral by a transplant nephrologist, recipient employment, and the diagnosis of

107 barrier(s) present, a study coordinator gave nephrologists recommendations about optimizing dialysis

108 determine whether eGFR reporting influences nephrologists' recommendations for dialysis initiation.

109 ed the association between late versus early nephrologist referral (LR, ER) and poor clinical outcome

110 lt to test the association between timing of nephrologist referral and mortality during the first yea

111 explore a possible association between late nephrologist referral before onset of renal replacement

112 Late nephrologist referral is an independent risk factor for

113 The decision by nephrologists, renal dietitians, federal agencies, healt

114 eated with peritoneal dialysis and pediatric nephrologists report its use in 65% of patients receivin

115 American, German, and Japanese nephrologists reported withdrawing dialysis for 5.1%, 1.

116 65 [55-76] versus 103 [78-144] patients per nephrologist, respectively; P<0.001).

117 According to responding nephrologists (response rate 53%), females were less lik

118 ratings of accuracy of information from the nephrologist, response to pain, amount of fluid removed,

119 isease, which we now appropriately label the nephrologist's tumor.

120 Referral to a nephrologist should be considered if chronic kidney dise

121 For many practicing nephrologists, sildenafil has become the first-line ther

122 ational Expert Panel comprised 24 transplant nephrologists, surgeons, diabetologists and clinical sci

123 twork of 225 private practice and university nephrologists (the Glomerular Disease Collaborative Netw

124 in), when many of these patients are seen by nephrologists, the use of diets very low in protein, and

125 This work is intended primarily for clinical nephrologists; therefore, each antiproteinuria intervent

126 ent with chronic renal failure will give the nephrologist time to fit the treatment to the patient.

127 to provide the documentation needed for the nephrologist to choose between these strategies.

128 enal or extrarenal symptoms should alert the nephrologist to HNF1beta-associated kidney disease.

129 Time from first evaluation by a nephrologist to initiation of dialysis, classified as la

130 ed nephrology nurse practitioner, allows the nephrologist to provide care for a great number of patie

131 This model allows the nephrologist to provide specialized care to more patient

132 It is essential for nephrologists to be informed and involved in cancer care

133 ephrologists were 60% more likely than adult nephrologists to recommend peritoneal dialysis for ident

134 driven by the highest principles will allow nephrologists to work together as a cohesive force in ac

135 rtension, and, in some cases together with a nephrologist, to institute pharmacologic therapy.

136 d with meaningful clinical outcomes may help nephrologists treat all their patients with CKD in an op

137 d kidney stone clinic staffed by a pediatric nephrologist, urologist, dietitian, and clinical nurse.

138 nducted a national random survey of 271 U.S. nephrologists using hypothetical patient scenarios to de

139 Cr values reached 3.0 mg/dl, at which time a nephrologist was consulted.

140 verall cost for admissions under the care of nephrologists was $7,925 versus $10,773 under the care o

141 Pre-ESRD care of patients treated by nephrologists was also less than ideal.

142 The number of nephrologists was variable and was low (<10 per million

143 lling for patient characteristics, pediatric nephrologists were 60% more likely than adult nephrologi

144 ly requests withdrawal of dialysis, American nephrologists were much more likely to stop dialysis in

145 Nephrologists were not more likely to prescribe ACEI tha

146 Nephrologists were randomly assigned to an intervention

147 Care tended to be transferred to the nephrologist when the Cr reached 4.0 mg/dl.

148 Of nephrologists who spent </=20 min, those at for-profit c

149 d by a committee of three independent expert nephrologists who were masked to the results of the test

150 It is important that nephrologists, who are frequently called upon to diagnos

151 Nephrologists will need to serve as advocates for ESRD p

152 sis of left inguinal hernia presented to the nephrologist with recent onset of dysuria and increasing

153 A total of 41 nephrologists with a caseload of 50-200 hemodialysis pat

154 d significantly lower patient caseloads than nephrologists with the highest mortality rates (median [

155 rovider-level characteristics between the 10 nephrologists with the highest patient mortality rates a

156 Nephrologists with the lowest patient mortality rates ha

157 Additionally, patients treated by nephrologists with the lowest patient mortality rates re

158 e highest patient mortality rates and the 10 nephrologists with the lowest patient mortality rates.

159 associated with a decreased likelihood that nephrologists would recommend renal transplantation for