Talk:Minimal change disease

message: Kaplan Qbank for USMLE Step 1 should not be a source for a wikipedia article, and whole sentences are lifted from a question explanation. The #2 source supports the t-cell hypothesis, but it should be noted that a full mechanism has not been elucidated. Don't have the time to properly rewrite it myself.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.151.226.44 (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: Are Stats correct? 
I've just read through this article and I'm not sure about the stats, especially 80% of paitients have a relapse. I have heard 20% from a doctor, alas I this is only ancedotal so I reluctant to change this. Greaterburdock (talk) 11:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Statistics

message: I am 26 yr old lady , biopsy was done and confirmed that i'm suffering from MCNS.
Initially protein loss in urine was 3.2Gms and Doctor prescribed me Prednisolone, then the protein loss came down to 1.8Gms and latr on it again increased to 6Gms then increased to 11Gms.
Then the usage of Tacrolimus was started along with Prednisolone.
Tacrolimus was used for 10months and the best result it gave was 2.1Gms. 
Now i started using Losartan 50mg (B/D) .
Since 1 year 2 months I Am facing this problem
Could any please let me know any one faced similar kind of problem????
Share the medicines used. ````
:Wikipedia is not a source of medical advice. If you believe your diagnosis or treatment is unclear you should first speak to your treating specialist. JFW | T@lk 13:52, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Medical Opinions

message: CJASN doi:10.2215/​CJN.05000516 (dead link) JFW | T@lk 13:51, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reported the DOI. Here's the URL: http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/content/12/2/332.abstract?etoc JFW | T@lk 15:36, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Minimal change disease. 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/20090110211953/http://pathweb.uchc.edu/eAtlas/Code/1503.HTM to http://pathweb.uchc.edu/eAtlas/Code/1503.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080430120928/http://www.unckidneycenter.org/kidneyhealthlibrary/minimalchange.html to http://www.unckidneycenter.org/kidneyhealthlibrary/minimalchange.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060610073258/http://kidcomm.org/ to http://www.kidcomm.org/
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) 01:52, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: I am a 4th year medical student that will be going into pediatrics. I am currently enrolled in a medical school course called “WikiProject Medicine” where I can update/build upon a Wikipedia article. I would like to improve this article over the next 4 weeks by adding more information, adding more organization to the article and adding citations to the good amount of information that is already there. To be more specific, this is what I’m looking to do.
1.	Signs and symptoms: I would like to focus specifically on the visible features of MCD in this section, expand on these features and have the information properly cited. (i.e. proteinuria, edema of the lower extremities, scrotum/labia, possibly even anasarca, signs of infection, thrombosis, acute kidney injury.) While explanation of oncotic pressure is important, this should be in pathophysiology section instead.
2.	Pathophysiology: As mentioned above, I would like to discuss oncotic pressure here. I would like to update the information with a recent 2017 review article though the pathophysiology is still relatively unknown. 
3.	Diagnosis: I would like to add more information with regards to approaching this diagnosis in a pediatric vs. adult setting (i.e. urinalysis/urinary dipstick, abnormal lipid panel, renal biopsy). 
4.	Treatment/Prognosis: I would like to create a Prognosis section (moving a significant chunk of the treatment section into it, while also adding references to the information). I would like to create a child and an adult subsection under prognosis since they have different outcomes and provide more cited information to both.   
5.	Epidemiology: Many of the statements in this section are not supported by references. I will either find update/confirm the information with a more recent source and build upon it. 
A large portion of my updates will come from two sources: 
Please let me know if you have any suggestions or thoughts with regards to my plan. Thank you! --Etriplec (talk) 14:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Medicine Student Edit 

message: Overall, I think you did a fantastic job with this article and completed your set out goals. My suggestions are minor tweaks, but I don’t see any major changes as being needed at this point. I will go section by section outlining my thoughts with respect to the completion of your goals as well as any other tidbits I might think of.
Introduction: First two sentences of introduction each require a citation. Otherwise, it looks good and is a concise summary of MCD.
Signs and symptoms: You set out to expand this section with proper citations and an emphasis on visible features. I think you accomplished this goal well and appreciate the added periorbital edema picture. There are two points that I believe could be improved though. First, you could combine the two paragraphs as there is some overlap and repetition of the information contained within. Secondly, the first paragraph of this section requires citations as it has none for the information it discusses.
Pathology: this section was not mentioned in your plan and I agree that it requires no changes. It looks good as is.
Pathophysiology: I agree with your plan to move the oncotic pressure discussion to this section. I like the subheadings for the respective proteinuria and edema. Looks good, no real suggestions for this part.
Diagnosis: you set out to add information with regards to the difference in pediatrics vs adult patients. It looks good from this stand point. I don’t see anything that needs to be done. Good job on this section.
Treatment: Your main goal was to move prognosis related information to its own separate section. I agree with this change. Focusing on just the treatment section though, overall it looks good. I’m not sure about including the information on other immunosuppressants, aside from cyclosporine, though as you yourself say that studies on their effectiveness are limited. It sounds like there’s not a clear consensus on those treatments yet and maybe the information should be left out.
Prognosis: Your goal was to create this section and include separate categories for adults and children. Overall, it looks good, and I didn’t see anything that needed to be changed.
Epidemiology: This section was not talked about in your plan, but I see you included some additional information. The only thing is to maybe include a citation for the first sentence. Otherwise, it’s good.
Etymology: You didn’t discuss this section in your plan and I agree it doesn’t really need to be changed. It doesn’t have any citations, but I understand this is a rather unusual bit of information to find a proper citation for. If you can find a citation, that would be great, but I don’t think, it actually needs one. If you still want to add one, I don’t think it necessarily needs to be a journal article.
In conclusion, great job. I think you really fleshed out this article and provided meaningful contributions to it. There were some minor tweaks I suggested but, all together, it looks good! I think you used appropriate sources and it's readable to a general audience with good flow. Ps wiki project (talk) 23:34, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Medicine Student Review