CJASN Recognitions

The success of CJASN depends on the contributions of authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. Each year, CJASN is pleased to recognize highly dedicated reviewers and impactful articles.

 

2020 Top 5 Reviewers

Peer review is integral to publishing high-quality, valid research. CJASN is grateful for the contributions of its many reviewers and would like to recognize the top five reviewers of 2020 for their time, insights, and dedication. They share their thoughts on the importance of peer review.

Ziyad Al-Aly, MD, FASN

       "Peer review is one way to contribute to moving science forward."

Raymond Hsu, MD

      

"While the peer review system is not perfect, I strive to provide helpful, constructive, and collegial comments with an end goal of improving each manuscript for readers to enjoy and learn from."

Kenar Jhaveri, MD, FASN 

       "Peer review is a very important process. Peer review allows for science to be validated. Every time I have had a paper peer reviewed by top journals—no matter how hard the postreview work is—it has always improved the study and the manuscript. Doing a peer review for a journal is providing a service to science, and I highly recommend all faculty to engage in this process."

Matthew Rivara, MD, FASN

 

       “I find providing peer review for CJASN immensely satisfying. It is both humbling to participate in the final stages of bringing the results of others’ research to the public arena, and also gratifying when I am able to help authors through suggested changes to manuscripts to better communicate and educate readers about their work. As an investigator, the peer review process has also consistently helped me to improve my own research and writing, something that I am always grateful for.”

Deirdre Sawinski, MD

       “Peer review is essential to the conduct and validity of the scientific process. As a reviewer, I enjoy the opportunity to contribute an outside perspective to my peers' work; I appreciate how my colleagues' feedback enhances the quality of my own research.”

 

Best of ASN Journals 2020

The editors of CJASN, JASN, and Kidney360 proudly present the high-impact articles that were discussed by the respective journal editorial teams during the “Best of ASN Journals: CJASN, JASN & Kidney360” session at Kidney Week 2020. These articles highlight innovative clinical, translational, and basic research in nephrology and present diverse, novel, and clinically applicable science across a variety of nephrology disciplines. These articles appeared online in 2020.

 

2019 Editors' Choice Articles

The following five articles, which published in 2019, were chosen because the Editors believe they exemplify the highest potential to inform future research, change clinical practice, and influence public policy, particularly in the United States. 

Fruit and Vegetable Intake and Mortality in Adults undergoing Maintenance Hemodialysis

Valeria M. Saglimbene, Germaine Wong, Marinella Ruospo, et al.

      

In this study of hemodialysis patients who completed food frequency questionnaires, only 4% of patients consumed ≥4 servings of fruits and vegetables per day as recommended in the general population. In the 8,078-patient study, there were 2082 deaths (954 from cardiovascular causes) over a median follow-up of 2.7 years. Compared with patients who had 0–5.5 servings of combined fruits and vegetables per week, those who had 5.6–10 servings and those who had >10 servings had 10% and 20% lower risks of dying from any cause, respectively, as well as 12% and 23% lower risks of dying from non-cardiovascular causes. 

Rate of Correction of Hypernatremia and Health Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients

Kinsuk Chauhan, Pattharawin Pattharanitima, Niralee Patel, et al.

      

Although there are no clear guidelines on sodium correction rate for hypernatremia, some studies suggest a reduction rate not to exceed 0.5 mmol/L per hour. However, the data supporting this recommendation and the optimal rate of hypernatremia correction in hospitalized adults are unclear. Researchers who assessed the association of hypernatremia correction rates with neurologic outcomes and mortality in critically ill patients with hypernatremia at admission and those who developed hypernatremia during hospitalization did not find any evidence that rapid correction of hypernatremia is associated with a higher risk for mortality, seizure, alteration of consciousness, and/or cerebral edema in critically ill adult patients with either admission or hospital-acquired hypernatremia. An editorial accompanies this study. 

Patients’ and Nephrologists’ Evaluation of Patient-Facing Smartphone Apps for CKD

Karandeep Singh, Clarissa J. Diamantidis, Shreyas Ramani, et al.

      

This study measured the quality, usability, and safety of 28 top-performing CKD apps on the iOS and Android app stores from the perspective of 2 CKD patients and 3 nephrologists. Both patients and nephrologists identified a handful of apps as high quality for a specific functionality, but only 1 app was identified as high quality overall by both groups. Patient evaluations of app quality also correlated poorly with consumer ratings from iOS and Android app stores. Even if an app is rated highly and deemed useful by nephrologists, it may not be viewed favorably by patients. An editorial and a Patient Voice editorial accompany the study. 

The Incidence, Causes, and Risk Factors of Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Harish Seethapathy, Sophia Zhao, Donald F. Chute, et al.

      

In an analysis of information on 1,016 patients taking immune checkpoint inhibitors as a treatment for cancer, 17% experienced acute kidney injury (AKI), 8% experienced sustained AKI, and 3% had potential immune checkpoint inhibitor–related AKI. Use of proton pump inhibitors, which are commonly used to treat stomach ulcers or acid reflux, was associated with a higher risk of experiencing sustained AKI. An accompanying editorial highlights the strengths and limitations of the analysis and stresses the need for additional studies. 

Secular Trends in the Cost of Immunosuppressants after Solid Organ Transplantation in the United States

Margaret E. Helmuth, Qian Liu, Marc N. Turenne, et al.

      

This study assessed the cost savings from substitution with generic immunosuppressive medications for organ transplant recipients and the Medicare Part D program. Investigators studied immunosuppressant medication costs for transplant recipients who received a kidney, liver, or heart transplant between 1987 and 2013 and filled prescriptions through Medicare Part D for tacrolimus or mycophenolate between 2008 and 2013. Overall, payments decreased for both patients (by 63%–79% for patients not receiving the Medicare Part D low-income subsidy and 24%–44% for those receiving the subsidy) and Medicare Part D plans (by 48%–67%) across the 3 organs and 2 drugs over the 5 years studied. An editorial and Patient Voice editorial accompany the study.