This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to theKidney failure article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
Hello, we are a group of medical students editing this page as part of a class assignment. We have compiled a list of suggestions to improve this article and would appreciate community feedback before we proceed with these edits. Here is a list of our suggestions:
We propose to insert the following content into the Kidney Failure#treatment section:
1) Prevention of Progression to End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD)
"A 2014 review of forty studies concluded that people who received early referrals (one to six months before the start of dialysis) to a nephrology specialist displayed reduced mortality, better uptake of dialysis, and reduced hospitalization.[1] The authors highlighted the resulting importance of early referral in preventing progression to ESRD.[1] "
“In non-diabetics and people withtype 1 diabetes, a limited protein diet is found to have a preventative effect on progression to ESRD. However, this effect does not apply to people withtype 2 diabetes.[3] "
"Dialysis is currently used to extend the lives of hundreds of thousands of patients with ESRD.[4] AKI typically does not require dialysis except when there is pre-existing CKD.[5] Currently, there are no studies which have compared the outcomes of hemodialysis to peritoneal dialysis. However, based on reporting, both forms of dialysis appear to be equally effective.[4] The choice of therapy may be selected based upon considerations of patient preference and quality of life.[4]"
"Kidney transplantation is a primary treatment option for advanced chronic kidney failure.[6] The 1-year survival rate for patients who receive a kidney from a living donor (living-donor graft) is 96%, while the 1-year survival rate for patients who receive a kidney from a deceased donor (deceased-donor graft) is 92%.[6]"
4) Treatment for AKI
“The treatment of AKI comprises varying possibilities, depending on individual cases, and includes diuretics, nutritional support, and dialysis. Overall, its primary goal is to hasten recovery and minimize complications and progression of the disease.[7]"
Can you simplify your first sentence by saying, "There are many different treatment approaches for AKI, including a,b,c." Please include a citation after every sentence, even if it is from the same source. You may also simplify the second sentence. Many ways to do this, one idea could be to remove "Overall", and just write, "The primary goal of treatment is to...."JenOttawa (talk)01:34, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your time and we appreciate any feedback or suggestions you may have!
^Dirkx, Tonja C.; Woodell, Tyler; Watnick, Suzanne (2017). Papadakis, Maxine A.; McPhee, Stephen J.; Rabow, Michael W. (eds.).Current Medical Diagnosis & Treatment 2018. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
^abcLiu, Kathleen D.; Chertow, Glenn M. (2015). Kasper, Dennis; Fauci, Anthony; Hauser, Stephen; Longo, Dan; Jameson, J. Larry; Loscalzo, Joseph (eds.).Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine (19 ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
^Waikar, Sushrut S.; Bonventre, Joseph V. (2015). Kasper, Dennis; Fauci, Anthony; Hauser, Stephen; Longo, Dan; Jameson, J. Larry; Loscalzo, Joseph (eds.).Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine (19 ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
^abAzzi, Jamil; Milford, Edgar L.; Sayegh, Mohamed H.; Chandraker, Anil (2015). Kasper, Dennis; Fauci, Anthony; Hauser, Stephen; Longo, Dan; Jameson, J. Larry; Loscalzo, Joseph (eds.).Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine (19 ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
^Dirkx, Tonja C.; Woodell, Tyler; Watnick, Suzanne (2017). Papadakis, Maxine A.; McPhee, Stephen J.; Rabow, Michael W. (eds.).Current Medical Diagnosis & Treatment 2018. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
nothing is "current" or "recent" in Wikipedia, as articles have no datelines. SeeWP:RELTIME.
We don't talk about "patients" but rather "people" or "people with X". PerWP:MEDMOS.
perWP:MEDREV, if something comes from a high quality MEDRS source and is not contested by other high quality sources, you don't need to attribute it. You can just say it as fact. The only reason to attribute in such a situation, is to give a date. So the first example you give could be simply: "People with impaired kidney function who received early referrals to a nephrology specialist had reduced mortality, better uptake of dialysis, and reduced hospitalization; the earlier the referral the better the outcome." OR "A 2014 review found that people with..."
"Other methods of reducing a patient’s progression to ESRD include intravenous contrast " does not make sense.
I am stopping here. Please revise per these suggestions and review that the content makes sense and accurately summarizes the sources before reposting.Jytdog (talk)03:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nsayed2 (talk)15:21, 15 November 2017 (UTC) Thank you for the feedbackDavid notMD. We have made changes to the first part of our suggested changes and are going live with it. We will make revisions to the other parts in the coming days.[reply]
The above two entities are completely different: this article covers the two entities resulting in failure. It should not address chronic kidney disease, which has 5 stages, 4 of which are not kidney failure, but impaired kidney function. Thus my edits changing "disease" to "failure".IiKkEe (talk)15:51, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all,I've made some contributions to the Kidney Failure article to improve clarity and provide practical, sourced information. The changes include:
Added a new section: "Methods for Estimating GFR" — covers Cockcroft-Gault, MDRD, CKD-EPI, Bedside Schwartz (for pediatrics), and direct measurement techniques.Included an external link to a publicly available creatinine clearance calculator (CrClCalculator.net) to support practical use.Added citation needed tags where existing claims lacked references to encourage verification and reliability.
All edits aim to maintain a neutral, informative tone and improve the article's medical accuracy for both lay readers and professionals. Feedback and improvements are welcome!Thanks!Krishnapd71 (talk)11:18, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed several issues, but further improvements are still needed. I'll try to work on them when I have free time unless other editors step in to help[2]Chronos.Zx (talk)12:41, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And as a look further, several of the ref links are broken or go to unrelated papers. I would guess this was AI-generated text with hallucinated references.MrOllie (talk)13:59, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that and i don't think crclcalculator.net is a spam external link. and i think there should be the methods by which user can calculate their kidney function status. there are many citations to be added but i was quite busy so i left to add them today. so can you please rool back and give me some time if you find something unusal them you can perform the deletion.Krishnapd71 (talk)02:33, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You have been spamming it onto multiple articles, therefore it is a spam link: spamming is a behavior, and one you need to stop. I checked your citations, and the links did not go to where the citations claimed they would. Rolling back to content with citations that fail verification would not be an improvement to the encyclopedia, so that is not an option. These papers you cited don't seem to actually exist. For example, the PMID number you entered for "The Bedside Schwartz equation for GFR in children" goes to a paper about Cochleostomy. The attached DOI goes nowhere. I can find no evidence that a paper titled "The Bedside Schwartz equation for GFR in children" exists - and I checked all the issues of that journal for the year of the citation. So the question is: why are there apparently fake citations in the content you added? -MrOllie (talk)02:49, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
previous I copy the template and I paste and I was editing the citation its was taking time to verify give me some time I am sure you won't regretKrishnapd71 (talk)03:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry For careless, I copy the Wikipedia Template Code And paste from other pages so that i can change link and due to busy time I keep as It and Go. You May Please Check This, Finally All Sources are research and verify. Still You Think I am A spammer You may block me Thank You.
Do not use chatgpt (or any other LLM) to generate content or citations for Wikipedia. As you have just learned, those programs frequently return false information.MrOllie (talk)03:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks For Your guidance. This Mistake let me learn more and know more about Wikipedia as beginner I became Confuse about using Wikipedia codes that's why I used It. I have addedMethods for Estimating GFR with proper citation. You may please verify. And also verify the external tool if it not needed you may remove. Thank YouKrishnapd71 (talk)04:14, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Krishnapd71, [.. You may block me...] No, please note that Mrollie is not an admin, so he cannot sanction you. But his concerns are valid. The link to CrClCalculator.net appears promotional and may be considered spam under Wiki guidelines.Chronos.Zx (talk)04:18, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Chronos.Zx I don't Think Its Spam You May verify Tool. And Its Calculation.
AS Wikipedia guidance we can add external link of those sites that provides information which can't be added to Wikipedia. So The Practical Calculation Of Tool can't be added to Wikipedia. That's why I Think Its Not a Spam. Other Wise You May Validate.Krishnapd71 (talk)04:23, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, 'Wikipedia guidance' does not allow you to edit war to try to force links into the article, nor does it allow you to systematically add this to multiple pages as you have been attempting to do.MrOllie (talk)12:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You Due To Your Ego I don't Know Why You also delete Methods of Estimation. Or you don't know about health care. Nor You Don't Know To see The references and Evidence. I respect Your Ego But you are not a good editor. It was Ok to delete the links, but You show your Ego Deleting Methods too. You not only delete the Methods of Estimation You Delete mine Hard work too. Thank You Mr.Krishnapd71 (talk)14:00, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale.
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are availableon the course page. Student editor(s):Np2021,David 21,Szarnke,Nsayed2,WikiTweeks11,Dkrishnan97. Peer reviewers:Np2021,David 21.
