Evidence
This page contains a snapshot of featured content which highlights evidence addressing key clinical questions including areas of uncertainty. Please see the main topic reference list for details of all sources underpinning this topic.
BMJ Best Practice evidence tables
Evidence tables provide easily navigated layers of evidence in the context of specific clinical questions, using GRADE and a BMJ Best Practice Effectiveness rating. Follow the links at the bottom of the table, which go to the related evidence score in the main topic text, providing additional context for the clinical question. Find out more about our evidence tables.
This table is a summary of the analysis reported in a guideline (underpinned by a systematic review) that focuses on the above important clinical question.
Confidence in the evidence is moderate or low to moderate where GRADE has been performed and the intervention may be less effective or likely to be more harmful than the comparison for key outcomes.
Population: Pre-dialysis or dialysis adults with hyperphosphatemic CKD ᵃ
Intervention: Calcium-containing phosphate binders
Comparison: Calcium-free phosphate binders
Outcome | Effectiveness (BMJ rating)? | Confidence in evidence (GRADE)? |
---|---|---|
Mortality | Favours comparison | Moderate |
Cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events | See note ᵇ | Low |
Recommendations as stated in the source guideline The 2017 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline on CKD-MBD makes the following recommendation: In adult patients with CKD (GFR category) G3a–G5D receiving phosphate-lowering treatment, we suggest restricting the dose of calcium-based phosphate binders (weak recommendation; moderate-quality evidence).
Note ᵃ Population as reported by the guideline. ᵇ The guideline reported results for this outcome narratively due to inconsistent results across studies. See guideline for more information.
This evidence table is related to the following section/s:
This table is a summary of the analysis reported in a guideline (underpinned by a systematic review) that focuses on the above important clinical question.
Confidence in the evidence is very low or low where GRADE has been performed and the intervention may be more effective/beneficial than the comparison for key outcomes. However, this is uncertain and new evidence could change this in the future.
Population: People with CKD G3a-G5 or G5D
Intervention: Lower concentrations of serum phosphate or calcium
Comparison: Higher concentrations of serum phosphate or calcium
Outcome | Effectiveness (BMJ rating)? | Confidence in evidence (GRADE)? |
---|---|---|
Serum phosphate | ||
Mortality | Favours intervention | Low |
Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) decline | See note ᵃ | Very Low |
Cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events | See note ᵇ | Very Low |
Serum calcium | ||
Mortality | Favours intervention | Low |
Cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events | Favours intervention | Low |
Recommendations as stated in the source guideline The 2017 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline on CKD-MBD makes the following recommendations: In patients with CKD (GFR category) G3a–G5D, treatments of CKD-MBD should be based on serial assessments of phosphate, calcium, and parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels, considered together (not graded). In people with CKD G3a-G5D, we suggest lowering elevated phosphate levels toward the normal range (weak recommendation; low-quality evidence). In adult patients with CKD G3a–G5D, we suggest avoiding hypercalcaemia (weak recommendation; low-quality evidence). In patients with CKD G3a–G5D, it is reasonable to base the frequency of monitoring serum calcium, phosphate, and PTH on the presence and magnitude of abnormalities, and the rate of progression of CKD (not graded).ᶜ
Note The guideline only identified evidence from observational studies to answer this clinical question. ᵃ Reported as inconclusive based on indirect evidence from 8 observational studies (N=3755). ᵇ Reported as inconclusive based on direct evidence from 7 observational studies (N=34231). ᶜ The guideline group also recommended reasonable monitoring intervals (not graded). See guideline for more information.
This evidence table is related to the following section/s:
Cochrane Clinical Answers

Cochrane Clinical Answers (CCAs) provide a readable, digestible, clinically focused entry point to rigorous research from Cochrane systematic reviews. They are designed to be actionable and to inform decision making at the point of care and have been added to relevant sections of the main Best Practice text.
- How does two-weekly administration of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents compare with weekly and monthly administration for people with anemia due to chronic kidney disease who are not on dialysis?
- How does recombinant human erythropoietin compare with placebo/no treatment in people with anemia of chronic kidney disease who do not require dialysis?
- How do newer continuous erythropoiesis receptor activators compare with older erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in people with anemia of chronic kidney disease?
- In adults with chronic kidney disease and secondary hyperparathyroidism, what are the benefits and harms of cinacalcet?
- How does calcium compare with alternative phosphate binders for adults with chronic kidney disease–mineral and bone disorder (CKD‐MBD)?
- How do biocompatible dialysis fluids compare with standard glucose dialysate for people receiving peritoneal dialysis?
- How does intravenous iron compare with oral iron therapy for adults and adolescents with chronic kidney disease?
- What are the effects of a low‐protein diet for non‐diabetic adults with chronic kidney disease?
Use of this content is subject to our disclaimer