| Revision as of 23:08, 9 November 2006 editColin (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,935 edits Initial version containing text directly lifted from WP:MEDMOS | Revision as of 16:57, 10 November 2006 edit undoColin (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,935 edits Expanded, with details on journals and books.Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Proposed|]}} | |||
| :''See also: ].'' | |||
| :''See also: ] and ].'' | |||
| In general, Misplaced Pages articles should rely on reliable ''']s'''. Good secondary sources are, for example, medicine textbooks. | |||
| Misplaced Pages's medical articles should use reliable published sources. These guidelines supplement the general guidelines at ]. The ideal source would be a general or ] in a reputable ], or a widely recognised standard textbook written by experts in their field. It is also useful to reference seminal papers on the subject, as part of documenting the history of the subject. | |||
| If the '''latest research''' findings arrived in your post-box today, great! But as you add them to an article make sure they are supported by background content. You might also want to consider waiting until other researchers have confirmed it, or it is integrated in review articles or medical books. If desired, you can broadly signify a trend without endeavouring to keep the reference list completely up-to-date with the very latest studies. | |||
| ==Some definitions== | |||
| Ideally every medical article should have | |||
| *a few historical references (e.g. first reported case, discovery of pathogenesis) | |||
| *one or two recent systematic reviews in core journals (like '']'', '']'', '']'',...). | |||
| *Textbooks are important as secondary sources. | |||
| *Some databases (like ] or ]) provide in-depth peer-reviewed information (but remember, nobody's perfect). | |||
| :''See also: ]'' | |||
| Ideally any online reference will be to an open sites that do not restrict access to non-professionals or require a subscription. ] (see below) may be very helpful to this end. | |||
| * A ''']''' in medicine is one where the authors participated in research or documented their personal experiences. They examined the patients, injected the rats or filled the test tubes, or at least supervised those who did. Many, but not all, papers published in medical journals are primary sources. Most medical journals have high editorial standards and ensure research papers are ]. | |||
| *'''References''' - are sources used as background to a whole topic and should be included as a bulleted list (start each line with an asterisk '*'). Citation details may be manually formatted, but the use of ] helps standardise their appearance. | |||
| *'''Footnotes''' - are sources provided to expand or verify specific details in the text. The same manual or template formating of citation details is used, but additional markup is needed to generate the footnote numbered links (e.g. <sup></sup>). ] describes cite.php, the latest of several methods, as summarised below. | |||
| * A ''']''' in medicine summarizes one or more primary or secondary sources, usually to give an overview on a medical speciality. Review papers and textbooks are examples of secondary sources. A good secondary source from a reputable publisher will be written by an expert in the field and be editorially or peer reviewed. Journalists writing in the popular press, and marketing departments who issue press releases tend to write poor secondary source material. | |||
| ==Good online resources== | |||
| * A ''']''' usually summarizes secondary sources. Encyclopedias, including Misplaced Pages, are tertiary sources. | |||
| In general, Misplaced Pages's medical articles should use published reliable secondary sources whenever possible. Reliable primary sources may be used only with great care, because it's easy to misuse them. For that reason, edits that rely on primary sources should only make descriptive claims that can be checked by anyone without specialist knowledge. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a secondary source. | |||
| ==Periodicals== | |||
| Periodicals include newspapers, magazines and journals. The very latest research is often published first here. Where an archive is provided however, then many decades of research can be accessed. | |||
| ===Medical journals=== | |||
| These are a natural choice as a source for up-to-date information for medical articles. They contain a mixture of primary and secondary sources, as well as less technical material such as biographies. Although almost all such material will count as a reliable source, not all the material is equally useful. | |||
| ====Core journals==== | |||
| ] is a crude guideline to a journal's authority. If the articles in the top journals tend to be cited most often by other expert authors, then it is not a bad idea to do likewise on Misplaced Pages. The core general medical journals include | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] (JAMA) | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] (BMJ) | |||
| * ] | |||
| Core basic science and biology journals include | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| ====Article type==== | |||
| Journal articles come in many types: original research, reviews, editorials, book reviews, correspondence, biographies and eulogies. Research papers are, of course, primary sources. A general review of a subject by an expert in the field makes a good secondary source. Such reviews often contain no original research but can make interpretations and draw conclusions from primary sources that no Misplaced Pages editor would be allowed to do. A systematic review is both a primary and secondary source - it sumarizes other papers but it does so in order to research the field and possibly come to a novel conclusion. | |||
| ===Popular science=== | |||
| Popular science magazines such as ] and ] sometimes feature articles on medical subjects. Whilst not peer reviewed, their advantage is that the material is explained in plain English. | |||
| ===Newspapers=== | |||
| Quality broadsheet newspapers can sometimes report medical news responsibly. Often, however, the distinction between science and pseudo-science is not maintained. Tabloid newspapers are virtually never a suitable source. The dictum "never let the truth get in the way of a good story" applies here more than anywhere. | |||
| ==Books== | |||
| ===Medical textbooks=== | |||
| Medical textbooks published by the academic press are an excellent secondary source. Ensure the book is up-to-date, unless a historical perspective is required. | |||
| ===Popular science and medicine books=== | |||
| These are usually tertiary sources, but there are exceptions. Some well known and respected popular science authors include ], ] and ]. | |||
| ==Online== | |||
| ===Reliable references=== | |||
| *] provides a lot of useful info with regards to ]s. | *] provides a lot of useful info with regards to ]s. | ||
| ⚫ | *] has encyclopedic content in plain English from the ]. | ||
| *] is a very big and reliable source. | *] is a very big and reliable source. | ||
| ⚫ | *]. | ||
| *] is an excellent reference for ] in medicine. | *] is an excellent reference for ] in medicine. | ||
| ===Background reading=== | |||
| ⚫ | *] has encyclopedic content in plain English from the ]. | ||
| ⚫ | *]. | ||
| *] is a UK website which provides an easy access for general practitioners and may be an interesting source. | *] is a UK website which provides an easy access for general practitioners and may be an interesting source. | ||
| *] has an excellent set of online anatomic preparations. | *] has an excellent set of online anatomic preparations. | ||
Revision as of 16:57, 10 November 2006
 | The following is a proposed Misplaced Pages policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. | Shortcut
|
Misplaced Pages's medical articles should use reliable published sources. These guidelines supplement the general guidelines at Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources. The ideal source would be a general or systematic review in a reputable medical journal, or a widely recognised standard textbook written by experts in their field. It is also useful to reference seminal papers on the subject, as part of documenting the history of the subject.
Some definitions
- A primary source in medicine is one where the authors participated in research or documented their personal experiences. They examined the patients, injected the rats or filled the test tubes, or at least supervised those who did. Many, but not all, papers published in medical journals are primary sources. Most medical journals have high editorial standards and ensure research papers are peer reviewed.
- A secondary source in medicine summarizes one or more primary or secondary sources, usually to give an overview on a medical speciality. Review papers and textbooks are examples of secondary sources. A good secondary source from a reputable publisher will be written by an expert in the field and be editorially or peer reviewed. Journalists writing in the popular press, and marketing departments who issue press releases tend to write poor secondary source material.
- A tertiary source usually summarizes secondary sources. Encyclopedias, including Misplaced Pages, are tertiary sources.
In general, Misplaced Pages's medical articles should use published reliable secondary sources whenever possible. Reliable primary sources may be used only with great care, because it's easy to misuse them. For that reason, edits that rely on primary sources should only make descriptive claims that can be checked by anyone without specialist knowledge. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a secondary source.
Periodicals
Periodicals include newspapers, magazines and journals. The very latest research is often published first here. Where an archive is provided however, then many decades of research can be accessed.
Medical journals
These are a natural choice as a source for up-to-date information for medical articles. They contain a mixture of primary and secondary sources, as well as less technical material such as biographies. Although almost all such material will count as a reliable source, not all the material is equally useful.
Core journals
Impact factor is a crude guideline to a journal's authority. If the articles in the top journals tend to be cited most often by other expert authors, then it is not a bad idea to do likewise on Misplaced Pages. The core general medical journals include
- New England Journal of Medicine
- The Lancet
- Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- British Medical Journal (BMJ)
- Canadian Medical Association Journal
Core basic science and biology journals include
Article type
Journal articles come in many types: original research, reviews, editorials, book reviews, correspondence, biographies and eulogies. Research papers are, of course, primary sources. A general review of a subject by an expert in the field makes a good secondary source. Such reviews often contain no original research but can make interpretations and draw conclusions from primary sources that no Misplaced Pages editor would be allowed to do. A systematic review is both a primary and secondary source - it sumarizes other papers but it does so in order to research the field and possibly come to a novel conclusion.
Popular science
Popular science magazines such as New Scientist and Scientific American sometimes feature articles on medical subjects. Whilst not peer reviewed, their advantage is that the material is explained in plain English.
Newspapers
Quality broadsheet newspapers can sometimes report medical news responsibly. Often, however, the distinction between science and pseudo-science is not maintained. Tabloid newspapers are virtually never a suitable source. The dictum "never let the truth get in the way of a good story" applies here more than anywhere.
Books
Medical textbooks
Medical textbooks published by the academic press are an excellent secondary source. Ensure the book is up-to-date, unless a historical perspective is required.
Popular science and medicine books
These are usually tertiary sources, but there are exceptions. Some well known and respected popular science authors include Oliver Sacks, Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould.
Online
Reliable references
- OMIM provides a lot of useful info with regards to genetic diseases.
- eMedicine is a very big and reliable source.
- WhoNamedIt is an excellent reference for eponyms in medicine.
Background reading
- MedlinePlus has encyclopedic content in plain English from the NIH.
- Diseases Database.
- GPnotebook is a UK website which provides an easy access for general practitioners and may be an interesting source.
- SUNY Downstate Medical Center has an excellent set of online anatomic preparations.
- National Organisation of Rare Disorders
- Merck Manuals
- The Virtual Hospital
- Ganfyd.org : ganfyd is a UK project, using mediawiki and restricted to qualified people (as a reaction to medical articles in wikipedia that can be edited by anyone). They have some 1600 medical articles.