This page is not a forum for general discussion about Anosognosia. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Anosognosia at the Reference desk.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine: Neurology / Psychiatry Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force (assessed as Low-importance). Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Neuroscience Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Anosognosia appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 March 2004. The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that people who suffer from anosognosia deny or do not know that they have relatively significant challenges such blindness or paralysis? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2004/March.

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 Anosognosia. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Should there really be a link to the Woodrow Wilson article in "see also?" Wilson did suffer a stroke in office, but AFAIK there's no contemporary diagnosis of anosognosia. This was hypothesized by a neuropsychiatrist in the 1970s. Moreover, the Wikipedia article does not make even an allusion to Wilson denying his incapacity, whether or not it had a biological cause. Gaijinlaw ( talk) 13:46, 11 November 2011 (UTC) reply

The name of this condition bugs me... In Greek, "anosognosia" means "knowledge of a non-illness". "Non-knowledge of an illness" would be "nosoagnosia"... Anyway, just my 5 cents. Poromenos 12:20, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Meh - probably because whoever named it didn't know Greek.. Could the confusion be related to a differing Latin and Greek syntax? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimw338 ( talk • contribs) 04:53, 29 February 2012 (UTC) reply

Hi Vaughan. I noticed you reverted my addition of Dunning-Kruger Syndrome, and I've just reverted your deletion of it. I reckon it is relevant under the "see also" section: it is a form of impairment that sufferers do not realize they have. OK, so it's not due to injury, but surely it's still relevant. best wishes, Robinh 21:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Fair enough, seems a good reason to me. Thanks Robin - Vaughan 10:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Did I miss it or is there no pronunciation key for this word? User:68.229.223.112 18:42, 21 November 2006 Ano-sag-nosia

The last sentence of the treatment section goes strait into saying something about "inoperable limbs". It doesn't seem to fit into the paragraph the way it is. SadanYagci 01:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC) reply

This article seems to have strayed from the neuropsychological syndrome of anosognosia after brain injury to largely talk about lack of insight in psychosis which is not what anosognosia refers to. The name is reserved from lack of insight after frank neurological disorder, as a search of PubMed shows. - Vaughan 07:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC) reply

The term's pretty common in psychiatry, due to the viewpoint of Fuller Torrey (Treatment Advocacy Center). Practically speaking, it refers to patients who challenge their doctor's point of view. 208.181.100.27 ( talk) 19:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC) reply

I just came to discuss this but saw that Vaughan has written it already. I really think that the article would be better if the psychiatric use of the term was kept separately, perhaps in another article or as a smaller note at the end of this one. It is primarily known as a neurological disorder and the article does not reflect this.-- Ihatechoosingnames ( talk) 22:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC) reply

"Unlike denial, which is a defense mechanism, anosognosia is rooted in physiology (for example, damage to the frontal or parietal lobe due to illness and disease)"

I assume 'rooted in' means roughly 'can be explained in terms of'. But then the claim seems contentious. Wouldn't some people argue that tendencies of the mind, such as denial, can ultimately be explained in physiological terms? Perhaps 'rooted in' is getting at the idea that defense mechanisms currently cannot be explained in terms of physiology, while anosognosia can. Omphaloscope talk 11:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC) reply

I can't wrap my head around the following sentence:

One study of voluntary and involuntary inpatients confirmed that committed patients require coercive treatment because they fail to recognize their need for care.[11] The patients committed to the hospital had significantly lower measures of insight than the voluntary patients.

Isn't it the other way around? Or does it mean "had significantly lower measures of insight before they were admitted (coercively)? I'd add a "needs clarification"-tag, but I'm not sure if it's just me or not. Katana ( talk) 14:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply

It makes sense to me as written. It's not clear to me where your difficulty lies. Looie496 ( talk) 16:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC) reply