Teerawattananon Y.Chavarina K.K.Phannajit J.Sutawong J.Yongphiphatwong N.Chawla N.Botwright S.Chuanchaiyakul T.Anothaisintawee T.Arogundade F.Ashuntantang G.Thammatacharee J.Sola L.Chuengsaman P.Chunharas S.Wibulpolprasert S.Tang S.C.W.Kanjanabuch T.Luyckx V.Ophascharoensuk V.Isaranuwatchai W.Jha V.Praditpornsilpa K.Tungsanga K.Limsawart W.Thitjuea S.Boonkaew S.Khamkom S.Tatiyanupanwong S.Ngam-prukwanit R.Supapol P.Kiatkrissada N.Thamcharoen N.Gandhi N.Chareonrungruengchai K.Khositrangsikun K.Piyawong J.Aryani H.Butani D.H.Pandejpong D.Sriprach S.Pichaiwong W.Dokkaew T.Sirilak S.Sitthitham N.Aiyasanon N.Kiattisunthorn K.Tabongkaraksa C.Dabak S.V.Boonma C.Mahidol University2026-02-072026-02-072026-01-01Nature Medicine Vol.32 No.1 (2026) , 44-4610788956https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/114859An abrupt policy change in 2022 — allowing patients to choose between peritoneal dialysis or hemodialysis — created severe unintended consequences for the Thai health system. A multidisciplinary commission found that interacting factors in the system were overlooked and that future dialysis policies must integrate more-diverse evidence and stakeholder views, prioritizing care quality and ethics while balancing equity and sustainability.Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyMedicineNoteSCOPUS10.1038/s41591-025-04144-12-s2.0-1050282269521546170X41566044