lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Community-acquired pneumonia

message: what does this garbage mean:
"CAP often causes problems like breathing,..."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.37.73 (talk) 21:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

message: On reflection, I have re-assessed this article as Start class and Mid importance. --Una Smith (talk) 17:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WPMED assessment

message: the xray image is poor quality, and is most likely a pleural effusion (not that you can not have a pleural effusion with a pneumonia). A x-ray with lobular consolidation would be more correct.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.5.180 (talk) 18:10, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  image 

message: NEJM doi:10.1056/NEJMra1312885 JFW | T@lk 21:09, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review 

message: The very first sentence, defining CAP, is flawed.  
Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) refers to pneumonia (any of several lung diseases) contracted by a person with little contact with the healthcare system. 
The intent is sort of there, but it makes it sound like it's caught by those with no health care at all, as opposed to simply being acquired outside of hospital settings.  Using the wiki's HAP definition as a guide, let's change that to read:
Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) refers to pneumonia (any of several lung diseases) contracted by a person who hasn't been in a hospital within the past 3 to 4 days.
Sound good?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MsgtB (talk • contribs) 01:17, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it's flawed. But where do you get 3-4 days? Shouldn't it be based on an official definition. Seems commonest definition is just infection of the lung parenchyma that is not acquired in the hospital. JuanTamad (talk) 06:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about: defined clinically, usually on the basis of the microorganism causing the disease (but unidentified in 50% of cases),  concomitant diseases and the presence of other risk factors, and whether the person has been recently hospitalized.
I like either of your suggested corrections.  Thank you!
I just got released from the hospital, with my diagnosis being CAP.  Looked it up and noted the odd wording, as I'm not someone with "little access to healthcare."  Dug around a tad, which led me to this wiki's Hospital Acquired Pneumonia.  I extrapolated the days from its "48-72 hours after being admitted."  It also cites two references: Mandell's Principle and Practices of Infection Diseases and The Oxford Textbook of Medicine, to back up that definition.
I'm not knowledgeable in the field of medicine. I started this talk page entry hoping to spark the interest of who knows more than I, who would be able to provide references as you did. I thank you very much! 
 
MsgtB (talk) 21:47, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of CAP is flawed.
Talk:Cryptogenic organizing pneumonitis

message: WHAT IS THE DEATH RATE WITH BOOP?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.246.62.174 (talk) 08:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WHAT

message: The answer depends on what the cause of BOOP is, and how severe the BOOP is. 
The cause could, for example, be amiodarone (ie, amiodarone-induced pulmonary toxicity, AIPT). AIPT can include BOOP, amongst other forms of pulmonary toxicity. In one clinical trial, approx 75% of patients with amiodarone-induced BOOP stabilised or improved after withdrawal of amiodarone, with or without steroid treatment (Chest 1992;102:1005-12). The prognosis of AIPT is generally favourable. Death attributable to amiodarone-induced BOOP occurred in approx 10% of cases reported in the medical literature, although the actual mortality rate in university clinics today probably is clearly lower. 
Severe cases of BOOP: Fulminant BOOP is possible after intensive chemotherapy given to some patients with leukaemia (Eur J Haematol 2004;73:67-70) or with other malignant cancers. In clinical experience, fulminant BOOP can often end fatally, although the exact mortality rate is not known. Fortunately, severe cases of BOOP are rare. 
Overall, the prognosis of BOOP is generally favourable. This is also true when we look at COP (COP = idiopathic form of BOOP). Fatal cases of COP are rare (King TE. Cryptogenic organizing pneumonia. In: UpToDate [Textbook of Medicine]. Rose, BD (Ed). Waltham, MA, USA. April 2007).
--Dara Koper (talk) 22:23, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Answer to: WHAT IS THE DEATH RATE WITH BOOP?
Talk:Fecal–oral route

message: What exactly does the Famous People sections in this article intend to convey ? Also are the words "argomegalous" and "acrogmegaly" typos of acromegaly (which is gigantism)? I think the Famous People section looks more like a spoof than any real information.
203.200.40.194 (talk) 05:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: it seems to have been removed in the meantime. EvM-Susana (talk) 07:51, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous People

message: Hi User:FrozenMan, I like your restructuring of this article. However, what appears now under "other" doesn't really fit as "other" is not a type of pathogen? Waterborne diseases could be caused by a range of pathogen types? I think we need to tidy this up somehow, perhaps move it to a new section? EvMsmile (talk) 11:53, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New categorization 
Talk:Murrain

message: I came here from the article Hekla where the term is used in relation to poisonous volcanic ash. the article here explains that in medieval times the meaning was generic - "so they simply put all illnesses under one heading". how can a generic title be "highly infectious"? --192.28.65.210 (talk) 22:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  infectious? 

message: 1. Christian apologists? Why them in particular and not just anyone? 
2.  Why would a famine weaken a population 30 years later, relative to other factors? Could this be editorial interpretation? 84.226.164.130 (talk) 20:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is sloppy on 2 points 

message: I suppose I'm one quarter curse (plague, disease, something?) especially considering my grandmother married a Murrian? It was McMurrian before they left Scotland some time in the 1800's. any feedback? 2602:306:CEC6:CAF0:9114:9D80:A873:A051 (talk) 05:13, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Compare Murrain v Murrian. Big difference. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murrian a name
Talk:Natural reservoir

message: Zabb17 (talk) 04:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ebola reservoir 

message: The article White-footed mouse says "It has also been found to be a competent reservoir for the Lyme disease-causing spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi." (Italics are mine.)  What is specific about the reservoir host being competent?  Are there other kinds of reservoirs for pathogens? RJFJR (talk) 13:51, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Competent' reservoir 

message: Much of this article is a WP:COATRACK or arguably a WP:FORK for a somewhat piecemeal, dated, account not up to WP:MEDRS of whether there are (or were) reservoirs for Ebola virus, somewhat contradicted by the rather better account at Ebola virus disease#Reservoir. I think we'll be better off without it, so I'm axing most of it now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ebola coatrack, fork, whatever 

message: Why is there a photo of a bat with no caption or explanation? --Muzilon (talk) 06:47, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncaptioned photo?
Talk:Pelvic inflammatory disease

message: "In the United States, more than 200 million women are affected by PID each year, and the rate is highest with teenagers. Over 100,000 women become infertile in the US each year from PID."
"A single episode of PID results in infertility in 13% of women."
Ok, firstly, the population of the United States is around 300 million. About half of that population is female, so there are about 150 million women in the United States. Saying that "more than 200 million women are affected by PID each year" is false because there are fewer than 200 million women in the United States. If that figure is right, it should at least be changed to say "there are more than 200 million cases of PID every year."
Also, if there are 200 million cases of PID every year, then 13% of that is 26 million. However, the article says "Over 100,000 women become infertile in the US each year from PID". Well, 26 million is 260 times as much as 100,000. So, there are two possible solutions here; for every woman who is rendered infertile from PID, there are 259 women who have already been rendered infertile by PID and got another infection, or the 200 million figure is way too high. Now, according to the 2nd reference:
"Each year in the United States, it is estimated that more than 1 million women experience an episode of acute PID."
It does say acute PID, however, the 1 million figure is referenced and seems more accurate than 200 million. As such, I'm changing the article to match with this reference. --221.131.73.156 (talk) 04:16, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The math doesn't add up (and neither do the references) 

message: Opening paragraph - "Although HI an STI is often the cause"
No explanation of HI  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noodle111 (talk • contribs) 10:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of unexplained abbreviations. 

message: Doc James, can you put up the  template so I can stay out of your way when you're working? LOL!
:  Bfpage |leave a message  11:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Wow, you edit at light speed

message: I did one pass through peer reviewer and was informed that the lead might be too long so I will do my 'editing for brevity'.
:  Bfpage |leave a message  21:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Except the lead is not too long. Not all advice at peer review is good advice. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Additionally your changes to the lead introduced some errors. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Pass through 'peer reviewer'

message: Is it okay to mention the way individuals with this condition walk? MightyArms (talk) 01:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  PID shuffle 

message: — Assignment last updated by WiseWillowPtarmigan (talk) 02:51, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Epidemiology ENPH 450
Talk:Anorectal abscess

message: I'm a bit confused by this statement at the beginning of the article:
    It arises from an infection at one of the anal crypts of Morgagni which 
    leads to inflammation and abscess formation.
The Lacunae of Morgagni article states that these structures are located in the male urethra. How does an infection in the urethra cause an abscess around the anus? Is this just a case where a disambiguation page is needed? Attys (talk) 00:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crypts of Morgagni clarification 

message: They CAN be treated in some instances by a course of antibiotics, without resorting to surgery. Been there, done that. 80.229.154.54 (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment
Talk:Preventorium

message: The current wikipedia page makes the American preventorium sound so innocuous, but many adult survivors of these (most of whom are 70+ years old) are coming to terms with the childhood trauma they experienced in what for them was a prison-like institution, isolating them from their families at such a young age. Please see for example the book The Preventorium: A Memoir by Susan Annah Currie. From the book's Amazon description: "Her exacting routine, dictated by the nurses and doctors who now acted as her parents, erased the distinction between patients and created both a sense of community among the children and a deep sense of loneliness. From walking silently single file through the cold, narrow halls of the hospital to nurses recording every detail of their bathroom habits to extremely limited visitation from family, Currie’s time at the preventorium changed her and those around her, leaving an indelible mark even after their return home." It is important that the Wikipedia reader understand this context and this legacy. Not logged in 2 (talk) 17:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section should be added about the isolation of children in these places
Talk:Stateville Penitentiary Malaria Study

message: Hi, I found your article well written and very interesting. I thought you had done your research well and it showed in your article. I think it would be very helpful if you discussed the basis for how the prison functioned in the historical context, with Jeremy Bentham and touched a bit more on the autocracy of the prison. Good job overall! Ssimko1 (talk) 05:30, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Ssimko1! I agree that the social roles defined by the prison are an important part of understanding Stateville. Currently, both Bentham's philosophies and the historical context are discussed in detail in the Stateville Correctional Center article. In my research, I didn't find many sources relating these concepts to the malaria experiments beyond a metaphorical comparison (like the analogies drawn in Dr. Comfort's article) and I'm not sure that type of connection is appropriate for a factual article. That said, I'll do some more research and see if I can work it into the article! Henryschuh (talk) 16:50, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I appreciate the comments! I've added links to some more of the key terms and reformatted the section headings properly. Sarfrazzle, I agree that info on results of the experiments would be useful to add. In my research on this topic, I haven't found any substantiated claims that results of the experiments directly led to new malaria treatments being used, or that any significant changes to malaria treatment are linked back to these experiments. I have found the many journal articles published by the researchers, but don't know of any broader impact. Perhaps someone with a scientific background on malaria treatments could contribute this to the article. Henryschuh (talk) 02:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Achard–Thiers syndrome

message: 18:19, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hello, this article has been assigned to our student group to edit over the next week or so. We wll document our proposed edits as we evaluate the article and brainstorm changes here. Catherinerbarton (talk) 20:59, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foundations II 2020 Group 1 proposed edits
Talk:The Homecoming

message: The Critical Response section to me seems biased, completely dismissing a view and poisoning the well against those who hold that view. I would change it myself but I don't know enough to make the right changes.
Igu Soni (talk) 16:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  The section is written in a slanted way that casts doubt on some critical views while presenting others as more credible.  Also, some critics' views are presented as facts (with citations).  This is incorrect use of attribution.  Even with citations, opinions are not facts.  What is factual, is that the opinions exist.  So the article should take more care to place a level of separation between itself and the opinions it presents.  Also, the section uses scare quotes in a way which appears intended to discredit certain critics, and which also creates unnecessary confusion for readers.  Augurar (talk) 01:38, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical Response
Talk:Cerebral salt-wasting syndrome

message: Moreover, random urine sodium concentrations tend to exceed 100 mEq/L in CSWS, but rarely, if ever, in SIAD. While the pathogenesis of CSWS remains unclear, several mechanisms have been proposed. (List of references...)
This came straight from this: http://www.scribd.com/doc/95742242/Hyponatermia JFW | T@lk 23:13, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: note
Talk:Congenital adrenal hyperplasia due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency

message: 216.143.112.115 (talk) 21:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: note

message: This article assumes that the use of prenatal steroid treatments, and postnatal genital mutilation are accepted and acceptable. There is no hint of any criticism of these practices. 96.231.17.131 (talk) 17:12, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hateful Trash 

message: Who are the target audience for this article? It uses highly technical language which is opaque to the average reader, and difficult even for someone with an academic education in another field. Please ping with reply. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 06:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: We try to make the style consistent with Wikipeida's Manual of Style on Medicine-related articles WP:MEDMOS, but if you found a technical term, please feel free to mark it with and we will try to explain medical jargon or use plain English instead if possible. Use   if it too specific for medicine. If you find an extreme opposite example, please use  . Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Target audience 

message: Can somebody please review the Genetics section to make sure that there are no errors in laying out genetics-related facts? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 16:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review the [[Congenital adrenal hyperplasia due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency#Genetics|Genetics]] section
Talk:Primary aldosteronism

message: JFW | T@lk 10:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Free review

message: 11% in resistant hypertension only, hence probably overreported in the past  JFW | T@lk 21:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prevalence 

message: Restriction of Conn's to adenoma - according to whom??? That's really not what we've been taught in the UK. Just leave it alone don't start making up stuff yourself on here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.52.65 (talk) 21:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a widely recognized distinction - Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine describes Conn Syndrome as an aldosterone-producing adrenal adenoma (Ch 342: Chapter 342. Disorders of the Adrenal Cortex).  Most cases of primary hyperaldosteronism are not caused by Conn Syndrome, although Conn's Syndrome is a type of primary hyperaldosteronism.  The restriction is a fair one, and not invented by a wikipedia editor.  Rytyho usa (talk) 21:14, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Conn's Syndrome is caused by an adenoma

message: doi:10.1210/jc.2015-4061 JFW | T@lk 14:49, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guideline 

message: It may be good to briefly mention this here in the diagnosis section or elsewhere, at least once a review picks up on it (maybe check if there is a review on this in a few years if that's needed). It's featured in 2023 in science like so:
a non-invasive alternative to difficult rarely-used catheter testing for a common cause of high blood pressure is reported (16 Jan).
 Prototyperspective (talk) 16:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New CT scan for diagnosis
Talk:Impaired fasting glucose

message: This page should be renamed as Impaired Fasting Glucose which is the name used for this condition by both WHO and ADA. I will let this comment sit here for a while before requesting to have the name changed.
The section "risk factors" does not include any factors which increase a person's risk of impaired fasting glucose.  Nor is it clear if and how much IFG increases the risks of the complications listed in and of itself, or if the risks of complications will arise if the IFG progresses to Diabetes Mellitus.  I would suggest that there should be sections for risk factors and complications, however, as an ICU nurse I have no particular expertise in the area of glucose metabolism: perhaps the input of an expert would be helpful. 203.193.192.78 (talk) 08:22, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: note
Talk:Nesidioblastosis

message: Although I've failed miserably to log in, I've altered the links found in the "External links" section so that they work - they required only minor tweaks of the 'remove www' variety.  JoBrodie (Diabetes UK) 81.150.194.1 (talk) 10:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: note

message: Evidence of physiologic mechanisms purporting that weight loss surgery conveys the ability to induce a more contemporary presentation of nesidioblastosis remains elusive and is of intense interest to diabetes researchers.91.183.159.198 (talk) 18:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  badwordin!
Talk:Primary hyperparathyroidism

message: Could someone please clarify the phrase "cause mortality", or "increased cause mortality"? I am a student of veterinary medicine and I know of morbidity, mortality and incidence as well-defined terms in the field of health care research and statistics; however, I have never heard of the above mentioned phrase before.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.50.212.40 (talk) 13:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause Mortality? 

message: Some explanation of the meaning of "quality of life improvement" might be a good idea in the asymptomatic surgery section. If the patient is asymptomatic, why would you expect any quality of life improvement?--Mongreilf (talk) 15:39, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quality of life 

message: JCEM has a string of articles about this. The key document is doi:10.1210/jc.2014-1413 - guidelines management of asymptomatic disease. JFW | T@lk 20:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Entire TOC lists the several articles relevant here TOC. JFW | T@lk 22:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Management 

message: doi:10.1210/jc.2014-2268 (meta-analysis) - in young patients the hypercalcaemia & -uria is more severe for the same elevations of PTH. JFW | T@lk 12:56, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Severity

message: I have removed the following two paragraphs as they are based on either anecdotal or ancient evidence:
:The serum chloride/phosphate ratio is 33 or more in most patients with primary hyperparathyroidism. However, usage of thiazide medications have been reported to causes ratios above 33. Studies without any usage of thiazide diuretics have estimated a serum chloride/phosphate ratio to have a sensitivity of 94% or 95% and a specificity of 96% or 100%.
:Recently fine needle aspiration of suspicious lesions seen on ultrasonography neck and estimation of parathyroid hormone levels in the aspirate has been shown to be a very useful test in localizing parathyroid lesions in patients of primary hyperparathyroidism with normal Tc99 sestamibi scan. Needle aspirate parathyroid hormone estimation has been demonstrated to have nearly 100% specificity and 100% positive predictive value in localizing culprit parathyroid lesions not picked up on Tc99 sestamibi imaging.Dutta D, Maisnam I, Selvan C, Ghosh S, Mukhopadhyay S, Chowdhury S. Role of parathyroidhormone estimation in needle washing of parathyroid aspiration biopsy in localizing 99mTc-sestamibi negative primary hyperparathyroidism: A series of seventeen patients. Clinical Otolaryngology 2014; 39: 174-197  Dutta D, Selvan C, Kumar M, Datta S, Das RN, Ghosh S, Mukhopadhyay S, Chowdhury S. Needleaspirate PTH in diagnosis of primary hyperparathyroidism due to intrathyroidal parathyroid cyst. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab Case Rep. 2013;2013:130019.  
Happy to reinsert content if better sources are presented. JFW | T@lk 11:31, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved as ancient 

message: Meta-analysis of LV mass in treatment of primary hyperparathyroidism: doi:10.1210/jc.2015-3202 JFW | T@lk 11:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  LV mass