Related Childbirth Risk Resources E pidural anesthesia has become increasingly popular for childbirth. The risks, however, may be greatly underplayed. This is a site in progress.
Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content – as such sources often include unreliable or preliminary information, for example early in vitro results which don't hold in later clinical trials. Some groups are quick to make decisions to maintain cohesion, but this can be a critical mistake to make. This lesson explains the concept of groupthink using the Challenger explosion as an example. Check to see if the information is current (less than three years old). Look for the credentials of the author (i.e. doctor, nurse, psychologist) to make sure the information is written by a health professional.
When available, academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources. However, some scholarly material may be outdated, in competition with alternative theories, or controversial within the relevant field.
Try to cite current scholarly consensus when available, recognizing that this is often absent. Reliable non-academic sources may also be used in articles about scholarly issues, particularly material from high-quality mainstream publications.
Deciding which sources are appropriate depends on context. Material should be attributed in-text where sources disagree. For example, a paper reviewing existing research, a review article, monograph, or textbook is often better than a primary research paper.
When relying on primary sources, extreme caution is advised: Wikipedians should never interpret the content of primary sources for themselves. No original research and Wikipedia: Neutral point of view.
Material such as an article, book, monograph, or research paper that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as reliable, where the material has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses.
Completed dissertations or theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate, and which are publicly available most via interlibrary loan or from Proquestcan be used but care should be exercised, as they are often, in part, primary sources.
Some of them will have gone through a process of academic peer reviewing, of varying levels of rigor, but some will not. If possible, use theses that have been cited in the literature; supervised by recognized specialists in the field; or reviewed by third parties.
Dissertations in progress have not been vetted and are not regarded as published and are thus not reliable sources as a rule. Some theses are later published in the form of scholarly monographs or peer reviewed articles, and, if available, these are usually preferable to the original thesis as sources.
Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence. One can confirm that discussion of the source has entered mainstream academic discourse by checking the scholarly citations it has received in citation indexes.
A corollary is that journals not included in a citation index, especially in fields well covered by such indexes, should be used with caution, though whether it is appropriate to use will depend on the context.
Isolated studies are usually considered tentative and may change in the light of further academic research. If the isolated study is a primary source, it should generally not be used if there are secondary sources that cover the same content. The reliability of a single study depends on the field.
Avoid undue weight when using single studies in such fields. Studies relating to complex and abstruse fields, such as medicineare less definitive and should be avoided. Secondary sources, such as meta-analysestextbooks, and scholarly review articles are preferred when available, so as to provide proper context.
Care should be taken with journals that exist mainly to promote a particular point of view. A claim of peer review is not an indication that the journal is respected, or that any meaningful peer review occurs. Journals that are not peer reviewed by the wider academic community should not be considered reliable, except to show the views of the groups represented by those journals.
They simply publish whatever is submitted if the author is willing to pay a fee.
Some go so far as to mimic the names of established journals see hijacked journals. If you are unsure about the quality of a journal, check that the editorial board is based in a respected accredited universityand that it is included in the relevant high-quality citation index —be wary of indexes that merely list almost all publications, and do not vet the journals they list.
News reporting from less-established outlets is generally considered less reliable for statements of fact. The agency should be cited in addition to the newspaper that reprinted it.
Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieceswhether written by the editors of the publication editorials or outside authors op-eds are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or authorbut are rarely reliable for statements of fact.
Human interest reporting is generally not as reliable as news reporting, and may not be subject to the same rigorous standards of fact-checking and accuracy see junk food news.
The opinions of specialists and recognized experts are more likely to be reliable and to reflect a significant viewpoint. Reviews for books, movies, art, etc. Press releases from the organizations or journals are often used by newspapers with minimal change; such sources are churnalism and should not be treated differently than the underlying press release.
Occasionally, some newspapers still have specialist reporters who are citable by name. With regard to biomedical articles, see also Wikipedia: Identifying reliable sources medicine. The reporting of rumors has a limited encyclopedic value, although in some instances verifiable information about rumors may be appropriate i.Sources; Reliable v.
Unreliable. Posted on June 7, by Edwin Long. Ease of finding reliable v. unreliable information. Let me give you some examples of what I mean. Last semester I was teaching an upper-level Sociology of Family Violence class.
The students each had to write short research papers on a research question of their . Hypochondria is the interpretation of bodily symptoms as signs of a serious illness. Frequently the symptoms are normal bodily functions, such as coughing, pain, sores, or sweating.
Although some people will be aware that their concerns are excessive, many become preoccupied by the symptoms. Explosive: A Review Of Fake Medical Tests March 5 | From: JonRappoport Over the years, during my investigations of deep fraud, I’ve uncovered very popular medical diagnostic tests that are wrong-headed, misleading, and fallacious.
N-PLURAL: The plural form of a few modern English weak nouns derives from the n-stem declension or n-plural of Anglo-Saxon (Old English).Examples include the masculine Old English oxa (which gives us the modern singular ox and the plural oxen), and the feminine word .
PARC corresponds with and mails a directory of these resources to prisoners, their friends and family members. We are often the first point of contact for people to connect with prisoners' rights organizations, community organizations, prison literature and arts projects, family and visiting resources, health care and legal resources, parole and pre-release resources, and the prison abolition.
Communication, in General. The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place. — George Bernard Shaw. If you cannot - in the long run - tell everyone what you have been doing, your doing has been worthless.