ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2015
Analysis of reference sources used in drug-related Wikipedia articles.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Beyond belief: a cross-genre study on perception and validation of health information online.International journal of data science and analytics · 2022Article
- Situating Wikipedia as a health information resource in various contexts: A scoping review.PloS one · 2020Article
- The Most Influential Medical Journals According to Wikipedia: Quantitative Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- A comparison of the content and primary literature support for online medication information provided by Lexicomp and Wikipedia.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2018Article
- Patient and Physician Perceptions of Drug Safety Information for Sleep Aids: A Qualitative Study.Drug safety · 2017Article
- Online information seeking by patients with bipolar disorder: results from an international multisite survey.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveReferences from drug-related Wikipedia articles and a drug information database were compared.
methodsDrugs in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) MedWatch alerts from January-July 2013 were searched in Wikipedia and Lexicomp to compare reference types and to assess the time for drug safety information to be incorporated into Wikipedia articles.
resultsWikipedia most commonly cited peer-reviewed journal articles (49.2%) and news articles (12.0%). MedWatch citations were incorporated into Wikipedia on average in 5.9 days.
conclusionsWikipedia cited various sources but may not be a reliable, up-to-date resource for drug safety information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.