Talk:Iatrogenesis

message: Iatrogenic changes are also seen within cervical smear patterns - they can be brought about by IUCD use, OCP (Oral Contraceptive Pill), Tamoxifen, Surgery, Radiation treatment, HRT, abalation, chemo, and DES exposure in utero (Diethylstilbestrol).194.176.105.132 (talk) 11:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iatrogenic changes also seen in cervical smears. 

message: WHY do medicines have side effects? What decides whether you GET a side effect, e.g. akathisia? I ask because you don't always get the side effects, like akathisia. Not sure if I'd ask this here, though. Pubserv (talk) 09:16, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You can ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Be careful to make sure that you aren't asking for medical diagnosis, IRWolfie- (talk) 09:41, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Side effects 

message: Some of the sources here seem older than the current sources on the issue. Is anyone watching this page who is familiar with the  Wikipedia guideline on reliable sources for medical topics? It seems like this article still needs some more fact-checking. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 22:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it. Oreo Priest talk 03:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your reply. I'll have to dig for sources on this, but this article looks like a good place to add some updated sources. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 16:00, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is watching this article? 

message: as you pointed out, the article on medical harm said that it included more harms than iatrogenic illness. However, I removed that statement as it was unsourced. Something that comes to mind is medical debt, which is a fairly new concept as only recently have people been able to get huge lines of credit in some places for health care which they cannot afford. However, I am not sure whether that cannot be termed "iatrogenesis", as it seems to be a problem originating from the doctor or a side effect of treatment.
What do you have in mind as the difference between iatrogenesis and medical harm? What material belongs in one article but not the other? Where do these articles not overlap?
I recognize that I have no source saying that the two are the same, but any source describing either of these terms seems to talk about the same concepts. The articles seem to have a lot of overlapping content, and perhaps it could overlap entirely.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Difference between iatrogenesis and medical harm?

message: * Comment I forbear to vote on this matter, partly because I lack authority in matters concerning medical treatment and terminology.  As it stands the existing article doesn't look too bad, but there are several considerations here, including the uncomprehending errors in terminology that one encounters in lay speech (I refuse to call it "lay terminology"; it is too inconsistent and ill-informed). Professional terminology frankly is not much better in such respects, so our article(s) had better be good. 
Etymology is not much justification in allocating definitions to words, being among other things capable of justifying any of large ranges of contradictory meanings, and allocated semantics also undergoing radical changes during the history of the usage of a given word. Then there is the question of which concepts are to be distinguished (eg "medical error" (either on one hand with or on the other hand without harmful consequences) as opposed to "unfortunate outcome of correct medical treatment" or "unfortunate effects after  medical treatment, not necessarily as a consequence of the treatment but because of tripping under a truck on leaving the surgery"). I'll not elaborate on the range of such meanings, because you folks obviously have a lot more of them at your fingertips than I do. 
Now, the thing is that many, though not all, such concepts need their distinct definitions, and there is no simple way to impose them in a way that is usable and acceptable to users of the 'pedia.  
:Therefore I suggest that we go beyond the proposed merges and take something like the following course of action:
: * Make a collection of all terms associated with such concepts related to medical circumstances, actions and outcomes.
: * Ensure that all such terms are acceptably represented in Wiktionary and cross-linked with WP
: * Create a redir for each term, or in special cases a disambig page if such do not exist already
: * Create a totally new article, the target for the redirs, partly comprising existing text, in which all the relevantly distinguished concepts are defined and discussed, and in which those for which specific terms can be allocated are properly defined. 
: * Because many of the existing terms are vaguely and arbitrarily defined, the article might have to be bold in the face of WP guidelines and popular usage, but that need not entail the worst possible end of everything; in the light of future developments future editors may be bold in turn. It is called progress.
: * Structure the article with care, so that readers need only read the lede plus the table of contents to see what to read when they only really wanted to ask about one or two terms.
Naturally this leads to a big article, but at least it will be coherent, comprehensive, and if well done, comprehensible and accessible. To show willing, I can offer to help as much as anyone wishes me to do, but I do not undertake to tackle any part of the job without broad-based acceptance and encouragement. JonRichfield (talk) 11:25, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting one(s) that/those. 86.128.169.211 (talk) 07:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge of Iatrogenesis and Medical error Part II

message: The first paragraph of this section says:
"Globally it is estimated that 142,000 people died in 2013"
Then the last one says:
" iatrogenesis may cause as many as 225,000 deaths per year in the United States"
How are US cases more than world cases?  Please correct.
Paul Siraisi (talk) 13:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epidemiology 

message: From the opening paragraph: "In 2013, an estimated 142,000 persons died from adverse effects of medical treatment, up from an estimated 94,000 in 1990."
This makes it sound like medicine is getting worse and worse. It is not a meaningful number without the context of how many medical treatments are done in total. I would say that this sentence is more disinformation than information. 173.174.45.155 (talk) 00:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening citation 

message: Would harm in the therapeutic/psychiatric-therapeutic setting fall under the Psychiatry section of this article? One example I am thinking of is treating a mental disorder like OCD with the wrong type of psychotherapy, and so the obsessions and compulsions get worse. This is a common error.
There is a lot of information on this sort of psychotherapeutic error and harm but I am unsure if it belongs within the scope of this article. There is an entire area of study within psychology on iatrogenesis with regard to transference as well, does that belong here? An example of that is mismanaging psychotherapy or psychiatric boundaries so that the relationship becomes dual and unbalanced. And if so, does it fall under psychiatry or rather, another category called psychology or psychotherapy?
If these topics don't belong here, I'd appreciate some thoughts on where anybody feels they would fit better. This doesn't seem to be a good fit. I am considering adding the information here as well, since the topic is extremely limited. ← 𝐋𝐞𝐟𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 14:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iatrogenesis in the psychotherapy-psychiatric setting -- seeking opinions of WP: OOS