Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 577

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The epidemiology of chronic kidney disease in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Stanifer, John W, Jing, Bocheng, Tolan, Scott, Helmke, Nicole, Mukerjee, Romita, Naicker, Saraladevi, Patel, Uptal·2014·The Lancet Global Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Amid rapid urbanisation, the HIV epidemic, and increasing rates of non-communicable diseases, people in sub-Saharan Africa are especially vulnerable to kidney disease. Little is known about the epidemiology of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in sub-Saharan Africa, so we did a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the epidemiology of the disease. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and WHO Global Health Library databases for all articles published through March 29, 2012, and searched the reference lists of retrieved articles. We independently reviewed each study for quality. We used the inverse-variance random-effects method for meta-analyses of the medium-quality and high-quality data and explored heterogeneity by comparing CKD burdens across countries, settings (urban or rural), comorbid disorders (hypertension, diabetes, HIV), CKD definitions, and time. FINDINGS: Overall, we included 90 studies from 96 sites in the review. Study quality was low, with only 18 (20%) medium-quality studies and three (3%) high-quality studies. We noted moderate heterogeneity between the medium-quality and high-quality studies (n=21; I(2)=47·11%, p<0·0009). Measurement of urine protein was the most common method of determining the presence of kidney disease (62 [69%] studies), but the Cockcroft-Gault formula (22 [24%] studies) and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula (17 [19%] studies) were also used. Most of the studies were done in urban settings (83 [93%] studies) and after the year 2000 (57 [63%] studies), and we detected no significant difference in the prevalence of CKD between urban (12·4%, 95% CI 11-14) and rural (16·5%, 13·8-19·6) settings (p=0·474). The overall prevalence of CKD from the 21 medium-quality and high-quality studies was 13·9% (95% CI 12·2-15·7). INTERPRETATION: In sub-Saharan Africa, CKD is a substantial health burden with risk factors that include communicable and non-communicable diseases. However, poor data quality limits inferences and draws attention to the need for more information and validated measures of kidney function especially in the context of the growing burden of non-communicable diseases. FUNDING: Duke University.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2214-109x(14)70002-6

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 577

Metadata

Authors
Stanifer, J. W., Jing, B., Tolan, S., Helmke, N., Mukerjee, R., Naicker, S., & Patel, U.
Venue
The Lancet Global Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
2
Issue
3
Pages
e174-e181
ISSN
2214-109X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998310232
Cited by
577
References
5
FWCI
5.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The epidemiology of chronic kidney disease in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s2214-109x(14)70002-6
The paper
Stanifer, J. W., Jing, B., Tolan, S., Helmke, N., Mukerjee, R., Naicker, S., & Patel, U. (2014). The epidemiology of chronic kidney disease in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Global Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(14)70002-6

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.