Talk:Hematuria

message: Hematuria can also be caused by bleeding due to impacts to the bladder, especially during running and cycling () . Someone (preferably an experienced MD) should cite that to improve the article. Fbergo (talk) 23:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports-related Hematuria 

message: doi:10.7326/M15-1496 is a clinical guideline from the ACP. All macroscopic haematuria, even if self-limiting, requires urological assessment. Microscopic haematuria on urinalysis requires microscopy for confirmation, and if there's no other explanation it should be assessed by a urologist even if the patient is on antiplatelets/anticoagulation. JFW | T@lk 08:44, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  ACP guideline 

message: but there isn't any indication of a corrective meatotomy, or any mention on the meatotomy page that isn't cosmetic on its page. 63.135.197.206 (talk) 16:51, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  I had to have a [[meatotomy]] (NSFW: graphic WP article) for having had this during prepubescence (blood in urine; male) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hematuria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070610091522/http://www.emoryhealthcare.org/departments/urology/sub_menu/upj.html to http://www.emoryhealthcare.org/departments/urology/sub_menu/upj.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi there,
We are a group of fourth year UCSF medical students who are taking the Wikipedia elective at our school. We hope to improve the way health information is disseminated to the public by editing existing articles. Over the next few weeks, we will work on this page, modifying content and structure and adding new references. We hope the changes made will be helpful to anyone who visits the page!
Copene (talk) 04:38, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:41, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Adjusted the section ordering to follow WP:MEDMOS Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:59, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  UCSF Medical Students Editing Hematuria 

message: GREAT JOB WITH ARTICLE! I LIKE YOUR BREAKDOWN OF THE TYPES AND THE IMAGE OF GROSS HEMATURIA. MY EDITS IN CAPS BELOW! Jmirzabe (talk) 05:09, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review for UCSF Wikipedia Class 

message: The image of actual hematuria is much better than an image of RBCs
Why do people think an image of RBCs and NOT hematuria is appropriate for the article on hematuria? IMO a strait image of RBCs is misleading. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:12, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead imagine

message: To the moderator, This is my first post ever and I am not computer saavy nor experienced in contributing, please read entire link and add realted content to wikipedia article as it is important and relevant.  Extensive reading that I have done on the subject of schistosome parasites and the diseases associated over the past four years, it is my honest opinion this parasite can be linked to many diseases of unknown origin in the U.S.. Distomum haematobium, Bilharzia haematobium "Schistosoma" haematobium (all one in the same) causative agent of hematuria, this was actually proven in 1851 by Theodor Maximillian Bilharz, a German physician, as per this article states.  The name Bilharz is also another name or earlier name for schistosoma haematobium. This information is very specific and verifiable and should be part of your article about hematuria. Thank you for all you do. 
The article reads;
Schistosomiasis is one of the most prevalent human 
parasitic infections. It is a major source of morbidity 
affecting more than 207 million people in 76 countries. It 
was estimated that 97% of the infected cases are on the 
African continent.(1) The disease is caused by trematodes 
of the genus Schistosoma, which exhibit dioecy and have 
complex life cycles comprising several morphologically
distinct phenotypes in definitive human and intermediate 
snail hosts.(2) 
The history of schistosomiasis in Egypt is longstanding 
for over 5000 years, with reports of Schistosoma 
haematobium eggs in ancient mummies.(3-7)  Schistosoma 
mansoni does seem to be a relatively modern arrival as it 
has not been found in mummies. Jury is still out on when 
S. mansoni first appeared in Egypt.(8) There have been 
numerous attempts to find descriptions of the disease in 
the medical papyri.(9,10) The most debatable word is "aaa", 
which occurs in over 50 early papyri including the Ebers 
papyrus. In some papyri "aaa" occurs together with the 
initial hieroglyph suggesting a penis discharging what has 
been interpreted as blood.(11) The juxtaposition is the 
papyri of "aaa", antimony-based remedies, and possibly 
worms in the body suggests urinary schistomiasis, and 
this interpretation is widely quoted in textbooks. 
Unfortunately, things are not as simple as this because no 
passages from the papyri link "aaa" with the bladder or 
urine and the discharge from the penis might represent 
semen and not blood. It is to be mentioned here that there 
have been a number of other suggestions about what 
"aaa"  might be, including hookworm disease.(12) This 
topic is discussed in detail by Nunn and Tapp (2000), who 
rejected  "aaa"  as a possible ancient Egyptian word for 
schistosomiasis.(13) However, since schistosomiasis was 
almost certainly common and widespread in ancient 
Egypt, it is strange that the Egyptians did not have a word 
for it unless it was so common that it was ignored.(12) 
Probably the first authoritative description of hematuria in 
the earliest medical literature is by Avicenna (Ibn-Sina, 
979-1037A.D.) in his famous book “Al Kanon fi al 
Tib”.(14) Centuries later, an epidemic among soldiers in 
Napoleon’s army in Egypt in 1798 was described by a 
French army surgeon, A. J. Renoult.(15) However, the 
cause of the disease was unknown.  In early 1851, 
Theodor Maximillian Bilharz, a German physician 
working at Kasr El Ainy Hospital in Cairo, discovered the 
causative agent of hematuria while performing an autopsy 
on a young Egyptian man. He named the parasite 
Distomum haematobium and reported his discovery in a 
series of letters to his old teacher, Carl Theodor Ernst von 
Siebold. In 1853, extracts from these letters with von 
Siebold comments were published in the German 
Zoological Journal.(16) At the time when Bilharz wrote his 
letters, he did not know that he was dealing with two 
species of schistosomes. He regarded these lateral-spined 
eggs as abnormalities.(16,17) Bilharz made the connection 
between schistosomiasis and hematuria later.(18) The 
peculiar morphology of the worm (the presence of the 
gynaecophoric canal or the schist) made it clear that it 
could not be included in the genus Distomum. The 
parasite was described in 1856 as Bilharzia haematobium, 
after its discoverer, by Meckel von Hemsbach in a thesis 
entitled “The Geology of the Human Body”. This work 
was published but had a limited circulation.(19) In 1858, 
Weinland, apparently not knowing of this thesis, 
described the worm as Schistosoma haematobium.(20) In 
1948 the International Commission on Zoological 
Nomenclature established the name Schistosoma and it is 
thus the current name of the parasite.(21) However, both 
bilharzia and schistosomiasis are used to denote the 
various diseases caused by the numerous species of the 
genus in man and animals.
Please read the entire article here:
Human Schistosomiasis in Egypt:... (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236153274_Human_Schistosomiasis_in_Egypt_Historical_Review_Assessment_of_the_Current_Picture_and_Prediction_of_the_Future_Trends [accessed Jun 24 2018].
(Dna91911 (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distomum haematobium, Bilharzia haematobium "Schistosoma" haematobium causative agent of hematuria 

message: Greetings all, below is some some general feedback about the page for your consideration. 
Overall Impression: Overall, great work! I like the structure of the page and feel like the subheadings follow the recommended structure of a clinical WP page. I also like that the content is focused and concise, highlighting the most pertinent information necessary for a hematuria illness script. The image of visible hematuria is relevant and the anatomical image is also helpful to the reader. 
Areas I thought were particularly strong: I found the introduction focused and thought it gave a good overview of the page. I liked the differential diagnosis was bulleted and linked to specific etiologies. Additionally, I liked the updates made to the categorization of the illness script (anatomical, temporality, frank vs microscopic) that you updated the illness script overall for the page. 
Areas I thought would benefit from continued editing: 
* Introduction-Paragraph#2: I would move the sentence “In general, nephrologists are the experts of glomerular..” to the end of this paragraph or make this sentence its own paragraph as the subsequent content is about differential diagnosis and logically follows the first two sentences. 
* Typo/confusing sentence: “The site that is bleeding is suggested by when hematuria begins and if it occurs throughout urination.” I would suggest writing: When hematuria becomes visible during urination and how long blood remains visible in the urine stream is suggestive of bleeding origin. 
* Section on “Temporality and Associated Symptoms”: I found the explanation of when hematuria begins during urination as an indicator of where bleeding is occurring within the urinary tract to be confusing and incomplete. I think the explanation could be expanded upon. 
* Microscopic hematuria section: Is it possible to hyperlink the following terms (in case your audience is not familiar with them)? High-powered field, hemoglobin, false positives, myoglobin.  
* Hemoglobinuria section: Is it possible to add a sentence describing when hemolysis would occur? Otherwise, this section feels random and without context. 
Epidemiology section: 
* I would clarify whether the prevalence statistics being referred to are global or United States-based percentages. 
* In the sentence “When asymptomatic populations are screened with dipstick and/or microscopy medical testing about 2-3% of those with hematuria have a urologic malignancy” I think you mean microscopy-based medical testing. 
* Is it possible to hyperlink “benzenes” and “aromatic amines.” I don’t think a general audience will know what these compounds are. I would also hyperlink “malignancy” and “radiation therapy” if WP pages on these topics already exist.  
* When discussing risk factors, I would recommend using the phrase “associated risk factors” or “causative risk factors” as appropriate.
* For the sentences “Microscopic hematuria results in a cancer diagnosis in 5% of cases. Macroscopic hematuria results in a cancer diagnosis in 40% of cases” I would rephrase “results” to is indicative of. Hematuria doesn’t cause cancer.  
* Evaluation section: I would change “Initial Negative Evaluation” to Follow Up Screening 
Management section: 
* The following sentence is incomplete: “One of three urologic emergencies that can occur with hematuria.”
* I would write out “CBC” and “BUN” as your audience might not know what those acronyms stand for. 
* Overall, this section is pretty technical. Is there anyway you can make it more accessible to a wider audience? 
* I find it odd that this section only focuses on acute clot retention when two other emergencies are mentioned at the beginning of this section. I think adding some additional content on anemia and shock would address this concern.
Again overall, really strong work. I hope my suggestions are helpful! 
CADonald (talk) 05:37, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review of the WP Hematuria Page. 12/15/19  

message: Thanks for the feedback!
I incorporated many of your suggestions. I think these suggestions added a lot to my work and helped improve the article further. 
For the management section: 
I chose to only focus on the management of acute clot retention since it is specific to hematuria while the other two occur with hematuria but also occur with other medical conditions. Also, each has  a wikipedia page devoted to the topic.
Marmasphan (talk) 10:03, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response to feedback 

message: User:N2e, the source cited is a practice guideline.  You can read a (slightly updated) copy at https://www.auanet.org/guidelines/asymptomatic-microhematuria-(amh)-guideline  It is describing the results of about 16 studies.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to make this a little clearer:  A practice guideline is the document that, if you are a healthcare provider and you don't follow it, your patient's attorney will be waving in your face during the malpractice lawsuit.  Providing WP:INTEXT attribution to a practice guideline, when there's no evidence that other practice guidelines both exist and disagree on that point, is a bit like providing in-text attribution to statements about a general scientific consensus.  The answer is "according to the entire profession".  WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:05, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prevalence 

message: Greetings everyone, this is Mohammad Aldalou, a medical student at Alazhar University and currently participating in the aforementioned course, and have assigned myself to improve this article.
My planned changes are as the following:'''
* Definition/ Improve with more scientific details
* Differential diagnoses/ Review
* Pathophysiology or Mechanism/ Add
* Diagnostic approach/ Edit it to method based categories and expand it
* Treatment or Management/ Improve and expand & covering follow-up
* Epidemiology/ Update to the latest statistics
* General Improvements/ Addition of citations where needed. 
 Mohammad Aldalou (talk) 01:22, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work Plan : Osmosis Wiki Editing Course  

message: Hello Wikipedians, I am a fourth year medical student from the United States who is going to attempt to improve this article. I have found several areas that could use improvement. A large portion of the article uses citations from unreliable/inappropriate resources, and not every sentence has a citation. There are citations from merriam webster dictionary, "Uptodate.com", and "Amboss.com". Further, not all links work. Some are generic "Uptodate.com" or "Amboss.com" links, and these are not accessible to those not in the medical community. I am going to improve both the reliability and quantity of references. Additionally, in terms of the structure and content of the article, I think the organization of the article can be adjusted to be more friendly to the average Wikipedia reader. Rather than begin the article with "Differential Diagnosis", I will adjust the article to begin with a "Causes" section and expand that upon it while also improving terminology and using images to give the average reader a better understanding of the topic. While I am going to attempt to revamp the entire article, I will primarily focus on the "Causes" and "Diagnosis" sections. To accomplish this, I intend to use primarily textbooks eg Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine and Essentials of Family Medicine, but I will also use secondary academic journal articles if available. Cheers. --Michaelorlando (talk) 14:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As an update to my previous post, I ended up veering away from my work plan. In this article, I rewrote the lead section, left the differential diagnosis section as the first section, added to it and corrected its citations, and I added the Evaluation section with visible hematuria and microscopic hematuria subsections. Cheers.Michaelorlando (talk) 21:55, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical Student Work Plan 

message: Overall, I think you did a great job in your edits to the article. I can see that you made a significant contribution, focusing mainly on the lead, differential diagnosis, and evaluation sections. I think you made this article much better for patients – congrats! Here are some minor suggestions for improvements:
1.	I know you had to veer from your original workplan, but I liked that your original plan was going to remove citations from sources like Amboss (as they are unlikely to be sources easily accessible to the average patient). Source 15 comes from Amboss, so I would consider finding another source like a textbook or PubMed article.
2.	I think there are a few places in the article where you could link back to another wiki article. An example would be for menstruation, as this is a term that not all patients (even female ones!) are familiar with and could add to the clarification.
3.	I would take a quick read through the article and correct some small grammatical/punctuation/spelling errors. An example is under “glomerular hematuria” in the differential diagnosis section, the first sentence needs an “and” – “A glomerular etiology is suggested by brown colored urine, red blood cells casts, dysmorphic red blood cells, [and] protein”.
4.	Under the “cystoscopy” subsection, I think you could clarify malignancy (e.g. cancer) and briefly explain some of the risk factors. 
Do not hesitate to ask for further clarification; as I said previously, I think you did a great job!Arwinter23 (talk) 19:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: — Assignment last updated by ClinicalSciences (talk) 17:44, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022