Wikipedia: a key tool for global public health promotion.

The Internet has become an important health information resource for patients and the general public. Wikipedia, a collaboratively written Web-based encyclopedia, has become the dominant online reference work. It is usually among the top results of search engine queries, including when medical information is sought. Since April 2004, editors have formed a group called WikiProject Medicine to coordinate and discuss the English-language Wikipedia's medical content. This paper, written by members of the WikiProject Medicine, discusses the intricacies, strengths, and weaknesses of Wikipedia as a source of health information and compares it with other medical wikis. Medical professionals, their societies, patient groups, and institutions can help improve Wikipedia's health-related entries. Several examples of partnerships already show that there is enthusiasm to strengthen Wikipedia's biomedical content. Given its unique global reach, we believe its possibilities for use as a tool for worldwide health promotion are underestimated. We invite the medical community to join in editing Wikipedia, with the goal of providing people with free access to reliable, understandable, and up-to-date health information.

Clinicians tend to overestimate improvements in asthma control: an unexpected observation.

AIM: The original purpose of this study was to determine the Minimal Important Difference for the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) but an unexpected tendency of clinicians to overestimate improvements in asthma control thwarted the endeavour. We describe the observed clinician bias and discuss its implications for clinical practice and research. METHODS: Ninety-four adults with inadequately controlled asthma received a full clinical consultation with one of nine asthma specialists. Medications were adjusted according to clinical needs. Four weeks later the same clinician estimated change in asthma control on a 15-point scale (-7 = a very great deal worse, 0 = no change, +7 a very great deal better). All patients completed the ACQ before each consultation but responses were not shown to the clinician. RESULTS: Clinicians consistently recorded that patients improved more than their change in ACQ scores suggested (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Clinicians should be aware of potential biases that may occur when estimating change in asthma control compared with measuring absolute status at each visit.