Review Article

Risk Factors Associated with Peritoneal-Dialysis-Related Peritonitis

Table 1

Assessment of methodological quality. Each statement scored with one point for the quality scoring.

(1)Provide in the abstract an informative and balanced summary of what was done and what was found.
(2)State specific objectives, including any prespecified hypotheses.
(3)Describe the setting, location, type of data collection and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment.
(4)Describe relevant data of follow-up time, including end of study period.
(5)Give the eligibility criteria of participants, and the sources and methods of selection.
(6)Clearly define all outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential confounders, and effect modifiers. Give diagnostic criteria for episodes of peritonitis.
(7)Explain how the study size was arrived at.
(8)Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding.
(9)Describe any methods used to examine subgroups and interactions.
(10)Give demographic characteristics of study participants, at least gender and age.
(11)Summarize follow-up time (average per patient and total amount).
(12)Report numbers of peritonitis episodes or peritonitis rate over time.
(13)Give unadjusted and confounder-adjusted estimates and their precision.
(14)Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision.
(15)Give a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence.