Talk:Assessment of kidney function

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Proposed merger GFR into Renal Function

Currently both have almost identically dupicated information on GFR calculation. Renal function has best overall structure, gives equations for differing units and is the parent topic (indeed one perhaps should also mention DMSA and MAG-3 nuclear medicine studies of renal function and differential function between the two kidneys). Glomerular filtration rate has though some better laid out equations (I like the setting out of additional factors rather than having "constant" that is then defined in the text).David Ruben Talk 13:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The two articles have differing and complimentary references, Renal function has better primary sources for quoting the formulas (vs as an example GFR having ref to an online GFR calculator), whereas GFR article has more references talking about factors that influence results and equations.David Ruben Talk 14:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you've made a strong case David and are on the right track re: merger. Merging makes sense to me.BillpSea (talk) 00:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Renal function encompasses GFR, so do merge.sarindam7 (talk) 18:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merged - I've also done quite a lot of rephrasing as discussion of GFR tended to give measuring creatinine as its example, which was then confusing when creatinine clearance later described. Also creatinine clearance described how it measures GFR, rather than approximates to this. I've also notice Creatinine clearance which duplicates again GFR and Cockcroft-Gault approximation formulas - I'll merge this in to for a single consistant description. David Ruben Talk 04:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've pulled interwiki links across here when I merged, but that leaves several items fro teh same language - should I have left the links on teh relevant redirect pages of Glomerular filtration rate & creatinine clearance ? David Ruben Talk 05:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the name of this article should be changed to "GFR" or "Glomerular filtration rate". Filtration is only one function of the kidneys, while re-absorption of electrolytes etc. is also an important function. As the current content is almost exclusively about filtration and GFR, it should also be named so. I have no problem with the article "Renal function" forwarding to GFR until there is valuable content for it, though.Grobi-Fan (talk) 15:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 June 2020

 Done With consensus to move, I have moved the content to the GFR article; there have been no objections other than one by myself previously, so I feel confident making this move even though I have been involved in the discussion.--Tom (LT) (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Renal function → Glomerular filtration rate – Entire page covers glomerular filtration rate; renal function is well covered on Kidney#Function and would be much better redirected there. Iztwoz (talk) 07:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. buidhe 00:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong oppose. Both are notable concepts that deserve their own articles. Renal function is some qualitative or quantitative measurement of how the kidneys work, eg from the amount of urine made, to glomerular filtration rate, to creatinine clearance to symptomatic function ie fluid status, development of uremia and so forth. Glomerular filtration rate is an equally notable measurement, widely used, but specifically relating to how the glomerules function. These should stay separate. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Addit. Looked at the article - woah! I do agree most of the content here should move to the GFR article though. Will join in editing once this discussion has completed --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tom, the proposal was to have two separate pages or rather to separate the two; this page is the redirect for GFR. For the page Renal function to stay it needs all the material from Kidney#Function to be copied and GFR to be split; or copied from the page renal physiology - but since renal physiology covers all apects of renal function would renal function be better redirected to renal physiology, or change the name of the page from physiology to function.? I only came here having looked at a recent posting on the talk page.--Iztwoz (talk) 20:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point Iztwoz, however I still disagree. "Renal function" is a notable topic (there are over 1.6 million google scholar hits [1]) and there is a lot to cover. There are whole review articles in notable journals about how to measure renal function [2]/ Renal physiology refers to how the kidneys work in all the different areas. Although it is usually the case in most articles in our anatomy space that we treat these the same this is not the same as renal function which usually refers to a specific parameter or way of calculating the function. Usually, renal function refers to specific ways that this is measured, like creatinine clearance, glomerular filtration rate, electrolyte and fluid balance etc. This is very notable because it influences what doses of drugs are prescribed and is a key measurement to commence renal replacement therapy. I volunteer to fix up this article once this discussion is over, if there is consensus to retain it.--Tom (LT) (talk) 09:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So are you suggesting page stays the same and is expanded, or do you think GFR needs to be split to its own page leaving Renal function to be expanded.? It seems you are for two pages; since renal function now has a small introductory paragraph a split to GFR would be straightforward enough or does that need a separate proposal? Thanks --Iztwoz (talk) 09:37, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The latter is what I'm proposing - that renal function stays as a general overview page, with a paragraph describing GFR and a link there, and that the gory details relating to GFR are split to a separate page. --Tom (LT) (talk) 11:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am in agreement with other proposers; it seems like we are just arguing about semantics. There is consensus for the content to move to the GFR article. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support since the article as written is about GFR, not about renal function more generally. A new article on renal function would be a good idea. Getting there via a split instead of a move would be possible, but almost all of this article would be split off. Dicklyon (talk) 02:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support An article on renal function would be useful, but as it stands it is substantially less work to make the current article focus exclusively on GFR than to remove the WP:UNDUE emphasis on GFR from a general renal function article. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New title

I have moved content to GFR as above, and renamed this article Assessment of kidney function as this seems to be the intended topic of the article - ie. how the kidney function is assessed and measured. I have chosen "Assessed" instead of "measured" because of the need to insert some clinical criteria as well. I've done this boldly so please let me know what you think. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Assessment_of_kidney_function"