Talk:Oxybutynin

message: Hi, maybe one would like to include a reference to this similar compound.
It is very popualr in china, but I cannot find any reference in wikipedia.
The uses are the same and the properties are similar.
Selang (talk) 21:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  phencynonate hydrochloride 

message: Kentera 3.9 mg / 24 hours, transdermal patch Kind regards: René--Crazy-Chemist 09:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oxybutynin transdermal patch 

message: What is YOUR supporting data for using the term 'possible' ? , instead of 'very effective' ?.
I think you are splitting hairs with me Scott1976. 
Someone else could easily remove your connection of Oxybutynin with hyperhidrosis altogether, because Oxybutynin is not actually licenced yet for hyperhidrosis.
Who says that YOUR wording is exactly correct, Scott1976 ?. 
Try45
Hey Scott1976
Are you going to respond to my comment??.
Try45  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Try45 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'm not sure which wording would be best.  That's why I've suggested discussion.  The wording in the article appears to be based on the three cited referenced.  I don't have access to the full text of the journal articles, only the abstracts.  At least one of them seems to be a case study involving only one patient.  If anyone has access to the full text, maybe we can see what the authors have concluded, and Wikipedia's wording should be consistent with that.  What do you think?  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  hyperhidrosis 

message: :In two well-designed trials in patients with overactive bladder, transdermal oxybutynin 3.9mg/day...
Has someone determined these two clinical trials of oxybutynin were "well-designed," and if so who? One likely source would be: those responsible for conducting the trials. Footnotes are desirable; however, they don't transform opinion into fact.
I've made a simple (albeit inelegant, perhaps) change to remove the unsupported assertion.drone5 (talk) 14:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clinical efficacy (POV ref. to trials) 

message: I added a paragraph to the pharmacology section, giving information on absorption time and half-life. I also found a source for the statement that the drug can cause calcium deficiency (the article recommends calcium supplements.) But this is eHow, which looks to be a contributor-built site. I am not sure it is trustworthy.
ChrisWinter (talk) 22:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition to pharmacology 

message: The structural formula at the top clearly shows 5 carbons between N and O in the chain at the right. The systematic name, at this point, uses the word butynyl, which would have only 4 carbons. (The space-filling picture could be in agreement with the systematic name, but it is very hard to count the carbons there.) The title of the article suggests that it is butynyl and not pentynyl, but I am not competent to really know which is correct. Nor do I have the tools or skills to fix it.   Solo Owl   15:20, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancy in the info box 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Oxybutynin's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "BNF76":
From Paroxetine: 
From Tolterodine: 
From Dicycloverine: 
From Tiotropium bromide: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:58, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Oxybutynin]] 

message: The first paragraph of the pharmacology section was uncited, so I checked the drugs.com page to see if it could be used, and discovered it's just copy-pasted. Not sure if the contraindication section (which is unreferenced) is also plagiarized from here or elsewhere. I have to go now so I cannot rewrite this myself - could someone please do so? The source and info itself are good. Just-a-can-of-beans (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarized section