|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wikipedia:Manual of Style (medicine-related articles) |
 |
This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Editors should follow it, except where common sense and the occasional exception will improve an article. Before editing this page, please make sure that your revision reflects consensus. |
This page proposes style guidelines for editing medical articles. Of course, the general rules from the Wikipedia:Manual of Style also apply when writing medical articles.
 |
This page in a nutshell:
|
Contents |
See also: Wikipedia:Naming conventions
The article title should be the scientific or recognised medical name rather than the lay term (common, unscientific, and/or slang name)1 or a historical eponym that has been superseded.2 These alternative names may be specified in the lead. Create redirects to the article to help those searching with alternative names. For example, heart attack redirects to myocardial infarction.
The article title is subject to the same sourcing standards as the article content. Where there is a dispute over a name, editors should cite recognised authorities and organisations rather than conduct original research.3 Where there are lexical differences between the varieties of English, an international standard should be sought. Some examples include:
See also: Wikipedia:Disambiguation
When one single term is used to describe two different topics, article titles must be disambiguated to resolve naming conflicts. To accomplish this, disambiguating words are used in parentheses after the article titles. When disambiguating a medicine- or anatomy-related article from an article about a totally different topic, the appropriate disambiguating words are "medicine" or "anatomy," respectively.
For example, "nail" may refer to several items, including a fingernail or a pin-shaped metal object used in construction. In this case, the appropriate article titles are Nail (anatomy) for the fingernail, and Nail (fastener) for the piece of hardware. Because neither of these articles can be considered a primary topic for the term, Nail is a disambiguation page that lists both articles.
When the medical or anatomical context is the primary use of the term, the article should not use a disambiguation word. For instance, the primary and most common use of the word "foot" is for the body part at the end of the leg. Thus, Foot is the appropriate title of the article; while Foot (measurement) is an article about the unit of measurement called foot. Use of "anatomy" is not appropriate.
In cases when a medical- or anatomy-related term is a secondary use for a more common usage, only the medical (or anatomical) article requires a disambiguation. Most commonly, "percussion" is used to describe an instrument that makes sound when struck, so Percussion links directly to the article about the instrument; the medical-usage of the term is located at Percussion (medicine).
When there are two or more distinct uses for the same term within medicine or anatomy, using the disambiguation word "medicine" or "anatomy" will not be sufficient for distinction between topics. In this situation, the general medical specialty (for medicine) or specific body part (for anatomy) should be used. For example, "foramen ovale" may refer to either the structure of the skull or the heart. Therefore, the appropriate article names are Foramen ovale (skull) and Foramen ovale (heart), respectively. Since neither anatomical structure is a primary topic for the term, Foramen ovale is a disambiguation page.
See also: Wikipedia:Make technical articles accessible, and Wikipedia:Explain jargon
Wikipedia is written for the general reader. It is an encyclopaedia, not a comprehensive medical or pharmaceutical resource, nor a first-aid (how-to) manual. Although healthcare professionals and patients may find much of interest, they are not the target audience.
Signs of writing for (other) healthcare professionals:
Signs of writing for (other) patients:
When mentioning technical terms (jargon) for the first time, provide a short plain-English explanation in parentheses if possible. If the concept is too elaborate for this, wikilink to other articles (or Wiktionary entries). For terms related to anatomical position, you can link to Anatomical terms of location, e.g. [[Anatomical terms of location|lateral]]. Alternatively, if the technical word is not used again in the article, it may be appropriate to use plain English and place the technical term within brackets. The etymology of a word can be interesting and can help the reader understand and remember it. Provide links only where they may help the readers and are reasonably focused on the topic.
Sometimes, information is specific to one country: for example, drug licensing and health service provision. Maintain an international perspective, for example by seeking out English-language sources from other countries.
A guide for journalists on how to translate the writings of researchers into something more understandable to the general public is available on the University of Kansas website here (PDF).
Medical usage of common terms often differs from that of the general public. This is particularly common with medical terms being used in legal contexts, with related but significantly different meanings.
Be careful in your descriptions of medical conditions; the words "disease" and "disorder" may not always be appropriate. Avoid saying that people "suffer" from or are "victims" of a chronic illness or symptom, which may imply helplessness: "survivor" or "individual with" are alternate wordings. Many patient groups, particularly those that have been stigmatised, prefer person-first terminology -- arguing, for example, that seizures are epileptic, people are not. An example of person-first terminology would be "people with epilepsy" instead of "epileptics". In contrast, not all medical conditions are viewed as being entirely disadvantageous by those who have them. Some groups view their condition as part of their identity (for example, some deaf and autistic people) and reject this terminology. For more advice, see Guidelines for Non-Handicapping Language in APA Journals.
Do not confuse patient-group prevalence figures with those for the whole population that have a certain condition. For example: "One third of XYZ patients" is not the same as "One third of people with XYZ".
Ensure your writing does not appear to offer medical advice. However, a disclaimer to this effect is not required4 since the general disclaimer can be accessed from any page on Wikipedia.
Infoboxes should be used where appropriate. These include
Full instructions are available on the page for each infobox. A suitable picture for the infobox is encouraged. For drugs, the 2D structure in SVG format is preferred, but PNG is acceptable. The easiest way to populate the drugbox and protein templates is to use Diberri's template-filling web site. Search DrugBank for the drug and enter the ID5 in this page, or search HUGO for the protein and enter the ID6 in this page.
The following lists of suggested sections are intended to help structure a new article or when an existing article requires a substantial rewrite. Changing an established article simply to fit these guidelines might not be welcomed by other editors. The given order of sections is also encouraged but may be varied, particularly if that helps your article progressively develop concepts and avoid repetition. Do not discourage potential readers by placing a highly technical section near the start of your article.
Clinical articles can achieve a level of consistency by limiting their top-level headers to those specified below. However, the spectrum of medical conditions is huge, including infectious and genetic diseases, chronic and acute illness, the life-threatening and the inconvenient. Some sections will necessarily be absent or may be better merged, especially if the article is not (yet) fully comprehensive.
A disease that is now only of historical significance may benefit from having its History section moved towards the top. Establishing the forms of the disease (Classification) can be an important first section. However, if such classification depends heavily on understanding the etiology, pathogenesis or symptoms, then that section may be better moved to later in the article. If a disease is incurable, then the Prognosis section can be moved up and a section called Management is more appropriate than Treatment.
The following list of suggested headings contains wikilinks; the actual headings should not.
The lead should highlight the name of the drug as per normal guidelines. The BAN or USAN variant may also be mentioned, with the word in bold. The initial brand name and manufacturer follows, in parentheses. Indicate the drug class and family and the main indications. The External links section is a magnet for online pharmacy spam and should be avoided if possible.
Try to avoid cloning drug formularies such as the BNF and online resources like RxList and Drugs.com. Extract the pertinent information rather than just dumping low-level facts in a big list. For example, a long list of side effects is largely useless without some idea of which are common or serious. It can be illuminating to compare the drug with others in its class, or with older and newer drugs. Do not include dose and titration information except when they are notable or necessary for the discussion in the article. Wikipedia is not an instruction manual or textbook and should not include instructions, advice (legal, medical or otherwise) or "how-to"s; see WP:NOT#HOWTO.
The following list of suggested headings contains wikilinks; the actual headings should not.
Avoid lists of trivia by working these titbits of information into the main body text. Sections on history or on popular culture may help to structure such factoids.
Articles on medical conditions often include lists of notable individuals who have (or had) the disease. This may be manageable if the disease is rare. For common conditions, it can become a distraction from the main article and contain much unreferenced and dubious material. If you do include such a list, ensure your entry criteria are well defined so that future editors may know if their additions are welcome. One restriction that some editors favour is to include only those individuals who have lastingly affected the popular perception of a condition.
Unsourced additions, particularly for living persons, must be removed. Responsibility for justifying controversial claims rests firmly on the shoulders of the editor making the claim. Be very firm about high-quality references, particularly about details of personal lives. Entries in the list must be notable (a straightforward test of which is the presence, or realistic hope, of a Wikipedia article). Non-notable relatives of notable people should not be included.
If the list is (or could be) long enough to support a separate article, then consider splitting it off. The format can be prose, such as Sociological and cultural aspects of Tourette syndrome #Notable individuals, or a list, such as List of people with epilepsy. Regardless, such articles must be well verified or they may quickly end up deleted. Wikipedia's Naming conventions generally discourage the use of words such as "notable" or "famous" in such list titles.
Etymologies are often helpful, particularly for anatomy. Features that are derived from other anatomical features (that still has shared term in it) should refer the reader to the structure that provided the term, not to the original derivation. For example, the etymology section of Deltoid tuberosity should refer the reader to the deltoid muscle, not to the definition 'delta-shaped, triangular'. The etymology in Deltoid muscle, however, should identify the Greek origin of the term.
In articles that focus on anatomy, please include the Latin (or Latinized Greek) name of anatomical objects, as this is very helpful to interwiki users and for people working with older scientific publications.
Many articles about eponymous diseases and signs include the origin of the name under the history section.
A link made in the infobox (such as to eMedicine) should not be repeated in this section. Large disease-related organisations and government health departments sometimes produce web pages containing substantial information that would be of interest to readers wishing to further study the topic. Such links are chosen for the information content, not because the organisation is particularly worthy or helpful. All links must meet Wikipedia's external links guidelines, which in particular exclude discussion forums.
Please avoid links such as these:
If the disease is very rare, then a manageable set of charitable organisations may be of encyclopaedic interest. In these cases, please prefer links that provide information that is likely to be interesting to readers worldwide, such as a detailed article on the specific topic.
Normally, however, it is better to link to an external web page that lists such charities, rather than trying to provide such a list ourselves. The Open Directory Project contains many such links, for which the {{dmoz}} template is useful. For example, on the Tourette syndrome page:
*{{dmoz|Health/Conditions_and_Diseases/Neurological_Disorders/Tourette_Syndrome/Organizations/}}
gives
For guidance on choosing and using reliable sources, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources (medicine-related articles) and Wikipedia:Reliable sources.
For general guidance on citing sources see Wikipedia:Citing sources, Wikipedia:Footnotes and Wikipedia:Guide to layout.
Medical articles should be relatively dense with inline citations. It is not acceptable to write substantial amounts of prose and then add your medical textbook to the References section. It is too easy for a later editor to change the body text and then nobody is sure which statements are backed up by which sources. Unlike many established scientific disciplines, medicine attracts controversy and opponents on even the most basic and commonly held facts. Where possible, it is preferable to reference review articles or other secondary sources instead of primary sources (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources (medicine-related articles)).
The Cite.php footnote system is preferred as a method of indicating your sources but is not mandatory—see Wikipedia:Footnotes for details. Some editors format their citations by hand, which gives them control over the presentation. Others prefer to use citation templates such as {{Cite journal}}, {{Cite book}}, {{Cite web}}, {{Cite press release}} and {{Cite news}}.
Abstracts of most medical journals are freely available at PubMed, which includes a means of searching the MEDLINE database. The easiest way to populate the journal and book citation templates is to use Diberri's template-filling web site or the Universal reference formatter. Search PubMed for your journal article and enter the PMID (PubMed Identifier) into Diberri's tool or the Universal reference formatter. If you use Internet Explorer or Firefox (2.0+), then Wouterstomp's bookmarklet can automate this step from the PubMed abstract page. Take care to check all the fields are correctly populated, since the tool does not always work 100%. Some editors prefer to expand the abbreviated journal name. AMA citation guidelines suggest that if there are more than six authors, include only the first three, followed by et al.7 The Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (URM) citation guidelines list up to six authors, followed by et al if there are more than six.8 If the full text is freely available online, add this to the "url" parameter in the template (or hyperlink your article title, if doing it by hand). There is no requirement to include a "Retrieved on" date for convenience links to online editions of paper journals, but "Retrieved on" dates are needed on other websources. For books, enter the ISBN into this page. A terse link to a PubMed article may be generated by typing PMID xxxxxxxxx in a similar manner to ISBNs, however full citations are preferred. For example:
produces the footnote
Multiple references to the same paper can be achieved by ensuring the reference is named uniquely. Diberri's tool can format a reference with the PMID or ISBN as the name. An alternative is to use a Harvard-style reference, for example: name=Hedley2004.
There are a number of templates that help format citations for common medical web sites. Full instructions are available on their respective pages. Note that the most common ones are integrated in {{Infobox Disease}}.
Suitable templates for navigation boxes can be found here:
Navigational boxes should follow a standardized style. Items should be separated by a middot template ({{·}}) followed (but not preceded) by a single space; the use of hyphens as list separators is not recommended. As when choosing article titles, drugs should be referred to by their International Nonproprietary Names, using piped links when required. More information about creating navigational templates can be found in the documentation of Template:Navbox.
Manually-added footnotes may be used to indicate the regulatory status of a drug; for instance, one may wish to note that a drug is still in development, is only used in veterinary medicine, or has been withdrawn from the market. The recommended order of footnote symbols is: *, †, ‡, §. Working examples may be seen in several navboxes, including {{HIVpharm}} and {{QuinoloneAntiBiotics}}.
At the end of the article, place [[Category:THECATEGORY]] for the categories it belongs in, but use the lowest appropriate sub-level. Useful top-levels to start looking under can be found on Portal:Medicine/Categories.
Stub articles may be categorised according to the list on this page.
APRDxxxxx, and may be found in the page's URL.hgnc_id=xxxx, and may also be found in the page's URL. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |