470:. I think this might have devastating effects on the page impressions of other sources of reliable, evidence-based medical information like those on Knowledge. I would appreciate your thoughts about this development: Are my concerns just a case of German angst? ;-) Do you plan to analyze the effects of this Google feature on the visibility of Ebm resources in general and on Knowledge pages with medical information in particular? As Google plans to expand this feature to other countries (possibly including Germany), do you have any suggestions on how to avoid negative effects? --
146:
That's a worthy cause. I would help train someone from
Cochrane how to do this. Does Cochrane have a mailing list that they could use to announce that experienced Wikipedians will happily volunteer to train someone on this? I can't say I'm ready to commit to volunteering for it yet though. Maybe
348:
Yes, correspondingly, for disease related articles the treatment section would be the place to add information regarding evidence. I think what Chris is asking is, if there are any guidelines that suggest evidence from a systematic review would be a preferred sentence, or if there is a standard
293:
What if we had a standard section in the
Contents for drug and intervention articles called "What's the evidence?" or simply "Evidence" or similar to both insert evidence into these articles in a standard spot but also to just introduce the notion of needing to refer to evidence and to validate
405:
Some of the editors were starting their edits with "A Cochrane
Systematic Review found that". I have generally advocated against this because I didn't want it to appear as though we were advocating a brand and thought it was sufficient enough that the source will always be seen as The Cochrane
423:
Yes we need to advise against this. 98% of the time we just want the conclusions. Only if there are systematic reviews that directly contradict each other like in the situation of breast cancer screening do we state "Cochrane found X" "USPSTF found Y"
306:
161:
Conversely, a list (or maintenance category) of all wikipedia articles citing
Cochrane sources would be useful, and could be ordered by the relevant subject group. I'd love to see a concerted effort to advance the use of
487:
We have had those google boxes for a long time. It just appears they are improving them. It does not appear that the data they contain is very indepth even now though. It is more at the level of the Mayo Clinic and the
39:
itself. Maybe I'm just biased, but it seems to me that it's a relevant page which would benefit from the right sort of attention from contributors who actually do happen to know something about the subject.
512:
479:
445:
415:
388:
358:
335:
280:
246:
193:
156:
141:
112:
90:
76:
49:
182:
WP articles cite outdated
Cochrane reviews. This is a particularly easy case of the more general problem (finding usage cases for superceded sources).
120:
We are looking for someone to go over all the new articles put out by the
Cochrane collaboration and than add or update our current content.
17:
504:
242:
437:
380:
327:
133:
68:
508:
406:
Library. But may be its worth discussing this and would be nice to have an official guideline on this?? Comments?
286:
Adding a section "What's the evidence?" as standard part of contents on drug and healthcare intervention articles?
475:
441:
384:
331:
137:
72:
285:
165:
36:
28:
302:
467:
187:
491:
Not sure how it will affect readership of
Knowledge. Only time will tell. Not that concerned though.
471:
466:. In both roles, I am concerned about the consequences of Googles new feature, rolled out this week:
298:
230:
152:
108:
103:
This sounds exciting. Where might interested editors be needed to help? What might they do? Thanks.
500:
86:
45:
173:
411:
354:
276:
238:
219:
433:
376:
323:
183:
129:
64:
364:
148:
104:
178:
etc. We should also be able to provide some tools to assist the process of identifying
492:
82:
41:
223:
218:
published each month. You can see a list of new articles in the
December 2012 issue
407:
350:
314:
I would call this the medical uses section where the evidence should be discussed.
272:
234:
425:
368:
349:
template where evidence is a subsection in the treatment/medicinal use section?
315:
121:
56:
268:
35:
Hello. Could I put in a shameless plug to look for help in improving the
463:
363:
The whole thing should be based on the best available evidence as per
401:
Editing content with "A Cochrane
Systematic Review found that"
222:. You can also subscribe to one of the feeds available on the
271:. I just made this edit based on a new Cochrane Review. --
459:
226:
to get notifications when new issues are published.
294:efficacy claims for healthcare interventions?
297:Feedback on this idea welcome! Thanks, Chris
8:
468:medical information from the Knowledge Graph
462:in Germany, and I am participating in the
444:) (if I write on your page reply on mine)
387:) (if I write on your page reply on mine)
334:) (if I write on your page reply on mine)
267:Check out the section on the treatment of
140:) (if I write on your page reply on mine)
75:) (if I write on your page reply on mine)
7:
454:Google Knowledge Graph, new feature
18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Medicine
24:
464:medicine project of de.wikipedia
1:
513:11:39, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
480:09:39, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
281:06:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
247:06:55, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
194:19:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
157:02:23, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
142:00:33, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
113:20:29, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
91:19:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
77:19:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
50:19:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
458:Hi there, I am working for
147:someone else will step up.
531:
446:09:37, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
416:18:17, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
389:14:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
359:13:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
336:13:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
307:13:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
214:There are new issues of
37:Evidence-based medicine
216:The Cochrane Library
250:
233:comment added by
192:
522:
497:
430:
373:
320:
249:
227:
190:
186:
177:
169:
126:
61:
530:
529:
525:
524:
523:
521:
520:
519:
493:
472:Andrea Kamphuis
456:
426:
403:
369:
316:
288:
265:
263:A new edit made
228:
188:
171:
163:
122:
101:
57:
33:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
528:
526:
518:
517:
516:
515:
489:
455:
452:
451:
450:
449:
448:
402:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
341:
340:
339:
338:
287:
284:
264:
261:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
253:
252:
251:
203:
202:
201:
200:
199:
198:
197:
196:
100:
97:
96:
95:
94:
93:
32:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
527:
514:
510:
506:
502:
498:
496:
490:
486:
485:
484:
483:
482:
481:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
453:
447:
443:
439:
435:
431:
429:
422:
421:
420:
419:
418:
417:
413:
409:
400:
390:
386:
382:
378:
374:
372:
366:
362:
361:
360:
356:
352:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
337:
333:
329:
325:
321:
319:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
304:
300:
295:
291:
283:
282:
278:
274:
270:
262:
248:
244:
240:
236:
232:
225:
221:
217:
213:
212:
211:
210:
209:
208:
207:
206:
205:
204:
195:
191:
185:
181:
175:
167:
166:Cite Cochrane
160:
159:
158:
154:
150:
145:
144:
143:
139:
135:
131:
127:
125:
119:
118:
117:
116:
115:
114:
110:
106:
99:December 2012
98:
92:
88:
84:
81:Great! #:-) —
80:
79:
78:
74:
70:
66:
62:
60:
54:
53:
52:
51:
47:
43:
38:
30:
26:
19:
494:
457:
427:
404:
370:
317:
296:
292:
289:
266:
229:— Preceding
215:
179:
123:
102:
58:
34:
408:Manu Mathew
351:Manu Mathew
273:Manu Mathew
184:LeadSongDog
170:in lieu of
299:Mavergames
269:Giardiasis
189:come howl!
149:Biosthmors
105:Biosthmors
55:Sure. :-)
495:Doc James
428:Doc James
371:Doc James
318:Doc James
224:home page
174:Cite pmid
124:Doc James
83:MistyMorn
59:Doc James
42:MistyMorn
505:contribs
438:contribs
381:contribs
365:WP:MEDRS
328:contribs
290:Hi all,
243:contribs
231:unsigned
134:contribs
69:contribs
235:Manum56
509:email
460:IQWiG
442:email
385:email
332:email
180:where
138:email
73:email
16:<
501:talk
488:NLM.
476:talk
434:talk
412:talk
377:talk
355:talk
324:talk
303:talk
277:talk
239:talk
220:here
153:talk
130:talk
109:talk
87:talk
65:talk
46:talk
31:page
27:The
29:EBM
511:)
507:·
503:·
478:)
440:·
436:·
414:)
383:·
379:·
357:)
330:·
326:·
305:)
279:)
245:)
241:•
176:}}
172:{{
168:}}
164:{{
155:)
136:·
132:·
111:)
89:)
71:·
67:·
48:)
499:(
474:(
432:(
410:(
375:(
367:.
353:(
322:(
301:(
275:(
237:(
151:(
128:(
107:(
85:(
63:(
44:(
40:—
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.