![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
This page is really quite messy. It simply provides some loose change on every specialism, without even going into the diagnostic process Technically, radiation oncologists are not Internal Medicine subspecialists. In the US, they are distinct from medical oncologists. DocJohnny 08:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
Allergy/Immunology This article leaves out Allergy/Immmunology and Nuclear Medicine as sub-specialties of IM. Just because the ABIM doesnt cover Allergy, that doesnt detract from its connection to IM. Wikipedia doesnt even have an article for Allergy as a medical specialty.
From what I have read, the UK general medicine docs are more like our family practice docs in that they have training in ob/gyn and pediatrics, is that true?
A bit of a late reply, but the questioner may be confusing UK general physicians, who are hospital doctors who deal with adult medical (as opposed to surgical, problems) with general practicioners, (often known informally as "family doctors") who work in the community and are the first port of call for the majority of patients, including obs and gynae and paediatrics.
I looked past that error numerous times. Good Grief. -- DocJohnny 04:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
I have classified this article as a start. It needs to be sourced. Capitalistroadster 08:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Am I right in thinking that the medical specialty is spelt like that even in British English, where the general word is spelt "speciality"? I'm sure I've seen it used in the UK. 81.153.110.216 03:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Does anybody know who calls IM Docs "Doctor's Doctor"? I think that this is backwards. IM Docs consult specialties like radiology and pathology to make their diagnoses and then they (IM) treat the patient. radiologists and pathologists are called "Doctor's Doctors" because their job is to advise other doctors and not to treat patients. I think we should delete that section of the article 208.63.240.59 21:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
If this section means to say that you can be an internist without being a physician then it's wrong... at least in the US, but probably by definition. Whatever a "Biomedical Doctor" is, if they aren't licensed to practice medicine then they can in no way be specialized in internal medicine. 208.63.240.59 21:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Since the references section has no actual references, I've taken it out. Until and unless someone goes through and starts listing citations in the text, there's really no need for it.-- Aervanath ( talk) 17:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The intro mentions "Doctors of Internal Medicine". This is a made up wikipedia term.
It is so misleading that I must put a POV label on it.
Let's not make up information or at least put a citation. JerryVanF ( talk) 05:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
More opinions.... "Internists are sometimes referred to as the "doctor's doctor," because they are often called upon to act as consultants to other physicians to help solve puzzling diagnostic problems"
Don't internist refer patients to dermatologists, surgeons, and others. So they ask for consultants and are not always consultants themselves. Aren't some of them rarely consultants but just general doctors?
So either find a citation or just eliminate this personal opinion that really isn't true.
This is not to suggests that internists are dumb. They are probably very smart. JerryVanF ( talk) 05:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the article was worthy of a POV alert, which I have removed. I have made a big edit on the introduction, and also added a new section on education and training (this came largely from the entry on physician, on which I have previously made a lot of edits). The next section, on definition of an internist, also need a lot of work and has POV issues, as does the list of subspecialities of internal medicine.
--DavidB 14:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
I recently attempted to add Dallas Nephrology Associates to Internal Medicine page only to find it was deleted as 'advertising'. I believe my link to be more plausible since:
1) This link, http://www.soundphysicians.com/physician-careers/employment-openings.aspx/, which is a 404 page (yet currently linked inside the Internal Medicine page) is listed on the site yet has no value.
2) http://www.henryfordinternalmedicine.com/ , another link on this page, is 100% self-promotional as the landing page depicts.
The link I added was an actual Internal Medicine facility which has nothing for sale. It's a Dallas-based internal medicine facility which is heavily accredited. Therefore, since it's plausible and not selling anything, it should be added and left unaltered.
98.212.117.91 ( talk) 12:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)Dave G.
This would be a step in the right direction for expanding the worldview on this page Tylerdore ( talk) 21:23, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Some issues in the lead are confusing for naive general readers like me:
I'd be grateful to have experts clarify these points for this heavily visited article. – MadeOfAtoms ( talk) 23:20, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 October 2022 and 18 November 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
MedKnightSB (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
As827245.
— Assignment last updated by DrDexterN ( talk) 20:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Overall:
You did a great job covering the breadth of internal medicine. I liked your inclusion of the various medical boards and the delineation of the process of becoming a board-certified physician. I enjoyed reading the history section and ethics section. It is clear that you put a ton of effort into this article. You were able to accomplish most of your workplan and I commend you for that. For future direction, I suggest adding information on the eastern influences of internal medicine, a graphic depicting the timeline of medical school and residency, expanding on the telehealth section, expanding on the EMR section, clarifying jargon from different countries, and in general adding more information to the subsection for completeness. Listed below are specific recommendations for the article:
1. The initial definition section and the Role of Internal medicine physicians section overlap in contact. I would be more concise to reduce redundancy.
2. History section:
The information outlines western influences on internal medicine. It would be interesting and beneficial to learn some of the more eastern influences. This would increase a global perspective on the article. Could be a future project!
3. Professional education training section clearly delineated the process in the United States. However, the process in the commonwealth countries could be expanded. Also, it would be nice to see a graphic representation of the training because there is a lot of jargon that can be unfamiliar to the general public.
4. In the certification section, I would simplify the jargon under the United Kingdom SubHeading. The core and medical training concepts can get confusing.
5. Charting in the EMR is a big component of an internist’s job. Adding information on this topic will make the article more complete. As827245 ( talk) 14:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
This page is really quite messy. It simply provides some loose change on every specialism, without even going into the diagnostic process Technically, radiation oncologists are not Internal Medicine subspecialists. In the US, they are distinct from medical oncologists. DocJohnny 08:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
Allergy/Immunology This article leaves out Allergy/Immmunology and Nuclear Medicine as sub-specialties of IM. Just because the ABIM doesnt cover Allergy, that doesnt detract from its connection to IM. Wikipedia doesnt even have an article for Allergy as a medical specialty.
From what I have read, the UK general medicine docs are more like our family practice docs in that they have training in ob/gyn and pediatrics, is that true?
A bit of a late reply, but the questioner may be confusing UK general physicians, who are hospital doctors who deal with adult medical (as opposed to surgical, problems) with general practicioners, (often known informally as "family doctors") who work in the community and are the first port of call for the majority of patients, including obs and gynae and paediatrics.
I looked past that error numerous times. Good Grief. -- DocJohnny 04:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
I have classified this article as a start. It needs to be sourced. Capitalistroadster 08:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Am I right in thinking that the medical specialty is spelt like that even in British English, where the general word is spelt "speciality"? I'm sure I've seen it used in the UK. 81.153.110.216 03:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Does anybody know who calls IM Docs "Doctor's Doctor"? I think that this is backwards. IM Docs consult specialties like radiology and pathology to make their diagnoses and then they (IM) treat the patient. radiologists and pathologists are called "Doctor's Doctors" because their job is to advise other doctors and not to treat patients. I think we should delete that section of the article 208.63.240.59 21:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
If this section means to say that you can be an internist without being a physician then it's wrong... at least in the US, but probably by definition. Whatever a "Biomedical Doctor" is, if they aren't licensed to practice medicine then they can in no way be specialized in internal medicine. 208.63.240.59 21:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Since the references section has no actual references, I've taken it out. Until and unless someone goes through and starts listing citations in the text, there's really no need for it.-- Aervanath ( talk) 17:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The intro mentions "Doctors of Internal Medicine". This is a made up wikipedia term.
It is so misleading that I must put a POV label on it.
Let's not make up information or at least put a citation. JerryVanF ( talk) 05:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
More opinions.... "Internists are sometimes referred to as the "doctor's doctor," because they are often called upon to act as consultants to other physicians to help solve puzzling diagnostic problems"
Don't internist refer patients to dermatologists, surgeons, and others. So they ask for consultants and are not always consultants themselves. Aren't some of them rarely consultants but just general doctors?
So either find a citation or just eliminate this personal opinion that really isn't true.
This is not to suggests that internists are dumb. They are probably very smart. JerryVanF ( talk) 05:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the article was worthy of a POV alert, which I have removed. I have made a big edit on the introduction, and also added a new section on education and training (this came largely from the entry on physician, on which I have previously made a lot of edits). The next section, on definition of an internist, also need a lot of work and has POV issues, as does the list of subspecialities of internal medicine.
--DavidB 14:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
I recently attempted to add Dallas Nephrology Associates to Internal Medicine page only to find it was deleted as 'advertising'. I believe my link to be more plausible since:
1) This link, http://www.soundphysicians.com/physician-careers/employment-openings.aspx/, which is a 404 page (yet currently linked inside the Internal Medicine page) is listed on the site yet has no value.
2) http://www.henryfordinternalmedicine.com/ , another link on this page, is 100% self-promotional as the landing page depicts.
The link I added was an actual Internal Medicine facility which has nothing for sale. It's a Dallas-based internal medicine facility which is heavily accredited. Therefore, since it's plausible and not selling anything, it should be added and left unaltered.
98.212.117.91 ( talk) 12:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)Dave G.
This would be a step in the right direction for expanding the worldview on this page Tylerdore ( talk) 21:23, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Some issues in the lead are confusing for naive general readers like me:
I'd be grateful to have experts clarify these points for this heavily visited article. – MadeOfAtoms ( talk) 23:20, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 October 2022 and 18 November 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
MedKnightSB (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
As827245.
— Assignment last updated by DrDexterN ( talk) 20:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Overall:
You did a great job covering the breadth of internal medicine. I liked your inclusion of the various medical boards and the delineation of the process of becoming a board-certified physician. I enjoyed reading the history section and ethics section. It is clear that you put a ton of effort into this article. You were able to accomplish most of your workplan and I commend you for that. For future direction, I suggest adding information on the eastern influences of internal medicine, a graphic depicting the timeline of medical school and residency, expanding on the telehealth section, expanding on the EMR section, clarifying jargon from different countries, and in general adding more information to the subsection for completeness. Listed below are specific recommendations for the article:
1. The initial definition section and the Role of Internal medicine physicians section overlap in contact. I would be more concise to reduce redundancy.
2. History section:
The information outlines western influences on internal medicine. It would be interesting and beneficial to learn some of the more eastern influences. This would increase a global perspective on the article. Could be a future project!
3. Professional education training section clearly delineated the process in the United States. However, the process in the commonwealth countries could be expanded. Also, it would be nice to see a graphic representation of the training because there is a lot of jargon that can be unfamiliar to the general public.
4. In the certification section, I would simplify the jargon under the United Kingdom SubHeading. The core and medical training concepts can get confusing.
5. Charting in the EMR is a big component of an internist’s job. Adding information on this topic will make the article more complete. As827245 ( talk) 14:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)