This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Prothrombin G20210A article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
![]() | A fact from Prothrombin G20210A appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 28 January 2012 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Prothrombin G20210A.
|
I think there is a mistake in this article. As it is now it states "Behind O-blood type,[1] prothrombin G20210A is one of the most common genetic risk factors,...."
I ready the article cited and it says that "The other 3 moderately strong genetic factors are associated with an increase, directly or indirectly, of the procoagulant potential of the blood: factor V Leiden, prothrombin G20201A, and blood group non-O.
To me this means that those with blood type A, B or AB would be risk factors for thrombosis, not people with type O. I am not an expert on this but I think it needs to be looked at.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bethalean ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Please do a diff from before and after my work today.
The article contained a lead mention of 2-3x increased risks of thromboembolism without clarity regarding which specific genetic condition and which source population was being described (single heterozygous vs other; generally healthy American, vs Asian, vs. No/So European, etc.), and the 2-3x information, where it appeared in the main body, was not sourced. (The extent that frequency/prevalence information appears later, it is various, for various populations.) Discussion of frequency/prevalence demands statement of whether the risks refer to homozygous versus heterozygous presentations, discussion of the occurence of this mutation in conjunction with Factor V Leiden, etc., etc. In short, the lead was simply not accurate, as presented.
In addition, the lead was far too long and detailed, and so some material was moved up, and then a break was created, and a Background section placed, to hold further introductory material unnecessary in the lead.
As well, various edits were made to the "Risk factors" (?) section, where a new naming nomenclature suddenly appeared (resulting in my UC to LC edit), and where mention was made of studies being "conversant" (made no sense, so removed). It appears that this and other copyedit-needing portions were added by a one-time, non-native English speaking editor, Madsread, see Edit history.
In that section, and elsewhere, inline citations to Wikipedia were removed as violations of WP:VERIFY, and tags were added to poor or dead sources. Finally, after some equivocation, I removed a photograph of a pair of legs, one apparently intended to present as discoloured and swollen—eventually removing it (i) because this is not an article about DVTs, but about one genetic locus that is a risk factor for that and other thrombophilic disorders, and (ii) because Doppler ultrasound and D-dimer and other factor and phospholipide clinical tests are the standard for accurate diagnosis treatment design (not physical examination, so the image is misleading). If we can find a flow chart related to diagnosis, or create a table placing G20210A alongside factor V Leiden, etc., etc. (see review added to Further reading), these would be better than the "believe me it is a DVT that involved the FII G20210 mutation" photograph.
The call for Expert was added to check these edits, and for the further reasons appearing in the tag and in the edit summaries.
Le Prof 50.153.156.160 ( talk) 23:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Prothrombin G20210A article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
![]() | A fact from Prothrombin G20210A appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 28 January 2012 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Prothrombin G20210A.
|
I think there is a mistake in this article. As it is now it states "Behind O-blood type,[1] prothrombin G20210A is one of the most common genetic risk factors,...."
I ready the article cited and it says that "The other 3 moderately strong genetic factors are associated with an increase, directly or indirectly, of the procoagulant potential of the blood: factor V Leiden, prothrombin G20201A, and blood group non-O.
To me this means that those with blood type A, B or AB would be risk factors for thrombosis, not people with type O. I am not an expert on this but I think it needs to be looked at.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bethalean ( talk • contribs) 18:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Please do a diff from before and after my work today.
The article contained a lead mention of 2-3x increased risks of thromboembolism without clarity regarding which specific genetic condition and which source population was being described (single heterozygous vs other; generally healthy American, vs Asian, vs. No/So European, etc.), and the 2-3x information, where it appeared in the main body, was not sourced. (The extent that frequency/prevalence information appears later, it is various, for various populations.) Discussion of frequency/prevalence demands statement of whether the risks refer to homozygous versus heterozygous presentations, discussion of the occurence of this mutation in conjunction with Factor V Leiden, etc., etc. In short, the lead was simply not accurate, as presented.
In addition, the lead was far too long and detailed, and so some material was moved up, and then a break was created, and a Background section placed, to hold further introductory material unnecessary in the lead.
As well, various edits were made to the "Risk factors" (?) section, where a new naming nomenclature suddenly appeared (resulting in my UC to LC edit), and where mention was made of studies being "conversant" (made no sense, so removed). It appears that this and other copyedit-needing portions were added by a one-time, non-native English speaking editor, Madsread, see Edit history.
In that section, and elsewhere, inline citations to Wikipedia were removed as violations of WP:VERIFY, and tags were added to poor or dead sources. Finally, after some equivocation, I removed a photograph of a pair of legs, one apparently intended to present as discoloured and swollen—eventually removing it (i) because this is not an article about DVTs, but about one genetic locus that is a risk factor for that and other thrombophilic disorders, and (ii) because Doppler ultrasound and D-dimer and other factor and phospholipide clinical tests are the standard for accurate diagnosis treatment design (not physical examination, so the image is misleading). If we can find a flow chart related to diagnosis, or create a table placing G20210A alongside factor V Leiden, etc., etc. (see review added to Further reading), these would be better than the "believe me it is a DVT that involved the FII G20210 mutation" photograph.
The call for Expert was added to check these edits, and for the further reasons appearing in the tag and in the edit summaries.
Le Prof 50.153.156.160 ( talk) 23:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)