Wikipedia:WikiProject Clinical medicine/Collaboration archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] 1) Topics we were working on

This is a list of current projects. Individuals may not want to review them yet, since they may not be complete.

[edit] electronic diagnosis

i am searching for software or websites to help diagnosis via computers. that is, a place where doctors can serach for symptons and find rare related diseases, and discuss medicine cases.

o open based repository for medicine information. does anyone knows one? --Alexandre Van de Sande 17:31, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] statkit1

Check out diabetic neuropathy, make any corrections and wikifications, and let me know what you think.

[edit] DryGrain

[edit] KSheka (talk)

[edit] JFdeWolff

[edit] Erich

  • In reality I suspect I'll remain pretty quiet for some time, although my WIKI MCQ engine for anaesthetic education project based on MCQs is coming on nicely (visitors still welcome)
  • I keep the digital camera handy and will aim for the odd photo to upload as well

[edit] Alteripse

The list here was outdated. See my user:alteripse page for a list of the articles I have started or added large portions to.

Most relate to growth, sexual development, genetics and metabolism, diabetes and hypoglycemia, and various hormones.

Add suggestions or requests to user_talk:alteripse.

[edit] Kpjas

Short term I am going to work on:

If I have some spare time I'd like to lend a hand with coordination work.

[edit] Nunh-huh

  • Syphilis - made article a bit more medical. The article would perhaps profit from the attention of a cardiologist (better description of cardiac complications) and a pediatrician (for congenital syphilis).
I'll take a stab at this. But first I'm going to add some structure to the medical portions of the article and more them together (move the description of the different stages to immediately before treatment). Ksheka 11:30, May 20, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] kd4ttc

[edit] Diberri

[edit] drgnu23

[edit] Davidruben

  • Oral contraceptive currently includes progesteron-only with combined, but most of side-effects/controversy only relevant to oestrogen. I think oral contraceptive should become just a brief introduction paragraph that links to separate COCP & POP pages. Have started a Progesterone only pill as a stub and will try, after my holiday, to port across relevant bits. Whole of contraception needs tidying up, consistant layout, standardised effectiveness and pro/cons between them (all in good time).

[edit] Mr.Bip

  • Asthma - an old MCOTW, I want this to be featured article quality
  • RNA interference - I'm wikifying an old paper that I wrote on exactly this topic
  • Carcinogenesis - I want this to be squeaky clean. Right now it's rather poorly written.
  • Cancer - likewise, an article as far reaching as cancer should be airtight
  • Biochemistry - when I get back to school, I'm going to read up on the history and write a good article on this
  • RNA - this article needs to be more complete

I want to make every subject you could normally find in a biochemistry textbook avaiable at WP. Mr.Bip 02:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cybergoth

[edit] Andrew73

  • Negative studies in medicine. Clinical trials with surprising outcomes. I just started this article, thought it might be an interesting way to review the negative studies out there that have had a significant impact as well as generate some discussion. I've started off with the flecainide trial, bone marrow transplant in breast cancer, and hormone replacement therapy. Other things for consideration include vitamin E in preventing heart disease, transfusion thresholds, etc. Hopefully it won't end up as an article for deletion! Andrew73 03:17, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mattopaedia

[edit] 2) Request for collaboration

This is a list of pages being worked upon where individuals would appreciate the active help of others in discussing and developing an article.

  • List of notable genes - this is a currently useless list that has to be split up into smaller ones. Who wants to tackle this with me? Mr.Bip 02:02, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
I help. We'll discuss on your talk page. NCurse work 12:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Guideline (medical) - very short description, but could do with some discussion over implications: eg who sets the guideline, who sets out acceptable cost of implementing, what if one does not follow a guideline. Please see some thoughts I put down in the Talk:Guideline (medical), which is almost longer than the actual article itself. I would suggest people contribute to the talk page discussion and then I 'll try and do a major edit (rather than us all trying to add little disjointed bits). David Rubentalk 18:00, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Corneal abrasion, Recurrent corneal erosion & Congenital lacrimal duct obstruction just written and I would welcome comments from anyone with any knowledge on the matters - ?any optician/ophthalomologist wikipedians? David Rubentalk 13:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 3) Things up for review

This is a list of recently completed pages that request review for factual/design/completeness reasons

[edit] KSheka (talk)

I've stopped saying my pages are not done. My pages are never done. :-) Ksheka

[edit] JFdeWolff


[edit] Diberri

[edit] Aside

[edit] Cloudsurfer

  • Diagnosis - This had something about history and I have added a section on hypothesis testing as well as toning down a rather overenthusiastic view that we could diagnose everything from the DNA. This is a core issue in medicine and really needs to be presented with references and academic justification. It could easily include the differential diagnosis within it with a redirect. Separating them is somewhat artificial.

[edit] Iglesias


[edit] Hitokirishinji

  • Hemoglobin - Added more info about different types, heme and a little more on the biochemistry behind CO poisoning, sorry if I stepped on any toes here, JFdeWolff if you want hemoglobin, I'll stop adding to it
  • Goblet cell - Created the stub, going to add more but need a free pic?
  • Thalassemia - added a little to the beta part

[edit] Davidruben

  • Pharyngitis - I split viral from bacterial. I listed some causative viruses - I'm sure there were more viruses I was taught at Medical School. I also tried applying some structure to symptoms & complications of streptococcal sore throats. Added some limks re the dabate as to the role antibiotics (Cochrane review and articl;es discussing it). Still needs some work, and I would be happy for any comments/suggestions David Ruben 15:14, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Seamen's Hospital Society and under their support the development of the Dreadnought hospital ships, later the Dreadnought Seamen's Hospital at Greenwich Hospital (now a ring-fenced funded speedy admissions Dreadnought Unit of St Thomas's Hospital London), and separately the Hospital for Tropical Diseases. Anyone have any further information on any of these topics ? David Ruben Talk 05:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Preczewski

  • Organ transplant Entirely reworked the structure and content. Re-wrote history. New to Wikipedia: would love any improvement or comment. Preczewski 04:14, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Howrealisreal

22:19, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cybergoth

[edit] InvictaHOG

New Wikipedian just finished my first two articles based upon requested articles
Internal medicine and pediatrics trained

  • Leukocyte adhesion deficiency
    Good article. I made some minor changes, removed some links. Fixed chromosome 21 link and put LAD into chromosome 21 article. My problem is LAD should point to the gene causing leukocyte adhesion deficiency. NCurse work 12:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Omphalitis

[edit] JoeWright

I've recently set up a new page called human iron metabolism as well as a couple of associated pages: hepcidin and a rewrite of anemia of chronic disease. I'd greatly appreciate review and suggestions and editing on any of these. In particular I am curious about whether the main article should be broken up or left as long as it is, and any suggestions about what to do to bring it up to featured article status. Would appreciate medically-minded reviewers before I send it to peer review. Thanks--Joewright 21:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)