Cited by 1,537Acute Kidney Injury ResearchChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesNephrotoxicity and Medicinal Plants

Acute kidney disease and renal recovery: consensus report of the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) 16 Workgroup

Open access
on behalf of the Acute Disease Quality Initiative Workgroup 16., Chawla, Lakhmir S., Bellomo, Rinaldo, Bihorac, Azra, Goldstein, Stuart L., Siew, Edward D., Bagshaw, Sean M., Bittleman, David +20 more·2017·Nature Reviews Nephrology

Abstract

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease are increasingly recognized as interconnected entities and the term acute kidney disease (AKD) has been proposed to define ongoing pathophysiologic processes following an episode of AKI. In this Consensus statement, the Acute Disease Quality Initiative 16 Workgroup propose definitions and staging criteria for AKD, and strategies for the management of affected patients. They also make recommendations for areas of future research with the aims of improving understanding of the underlying processes and improving outcomes. Consensus definitions have been reached for both acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) and these definitions are now routinely used in research and clinical practice. The KDIGO guideline defines AKI as an abrupt decrease in kidney function occurring over 7 days or less, whereas CKD is defined by the persistence of kidney disease for a period of >90 days. AKI and CKD are increasingly recognized as related entities and in some instances probably represent a continuum of the disease process. For patients in whom pathophysiologic processes are ongoing, the term acute kidney disease (AKD) has been proposed to define the course of disease after AKI; however, definitions of AKD and strategies for the management of patients with AKD are not currently available. In this consensus statement, the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) proposes definitions, staging criteria for AKD, and strategies for the management of affected patients. We also make recommendations for areas of future research, which aim to improve understanding of the underlying processes and improve outcomes for patients with AKD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrneph.2017.2

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
16., O. B. O. T. A. D. Q. I. W., Chawla, L. S., Bellomo, R., Bihorac, A., Goldstein, S. L., Siew, E. D., Bagshaw, S. M., Bittleman, D., Cruz, D., Endre, Z., Fitzgerald, R. L., Forni, L., Kane-Gill, S. L., Hoste, E., Koyner, J., Liu, K. D., Macedo, E., Mehta, R., Murray, P., Nadim, M., Ostermann, M., Palevsky, P. M., Pannu, N., Rosner, M., Wald, R., Zarbock, A., Ronco, C., & Kellum, J. A.
Affiliations
  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Royal Surrey County Hospital (GB)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
  • University of California System (US)
  • University College Dublin (IE)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
  • University Hospital Münster (DE)
Corresponding author
Chawla, Lakhmir S.
Venue
Nature Reviews Nephrology
Published
2017-02-27
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
241-257
ISSN
  • 1745-8323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1759-5061
  • 1759-507X
OpenAlex
W2591419591
Cited by
1,537
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 153 · 2025: 182 · 2024: 205 · 2023: 190 · 2022: 200 · 2021: 231 · 2020: 147 · 2019: 113 · 2018: 74 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
13.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Nephrology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Acute Kidney Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Nephrotoxicity and Medicinal Plants
Keywords
acute kidney disease, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, renal function recovery, disease definition, disease staging
MeSH terms
Humans, Remission Induction, Renal Insufficiency, Chronic, Acute Kidney Injury

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review