Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
While some writers have used terms like "reliable" [13] to describe Healthline, others have questioned both the quality of its content and its usability and readability. For example, the site Health News Review said a Healthline article about a new medication used promotional language copied from the drug-maker's press release, neglected to cite side effects, and framed the drug's claimed ...
Due to the heightened requirements for biomedical and medical sources on Wikipedia, the consensus of editors in the RFC is to deprecate Healthline as an unusable source that cannot meet WP:MEDRS and to blacklist Healthline as a hazard to readers. References to Healthline should be removed from Wikipedia.
Biomedical information must be based on reliable, third-party published secondary sources, and must accurately reflect current knowledge.This guideline supports the general sourcing policy with specific attention to what is appropriate for medical content in any Wikipedia article, including those on alternative medicine.
The Internet is widely used by the general public as a tool for finding health information. [1] In the late 1990s, researchers noted an increase in Internet users' access to health-related content despite the variation in the quality of information, level of accessibility, and overall health literacy. [2]
A new survey of 1,000 Gen Z users by the personal trainer app Zing Coach found that 56% of respondents go to TikTok for health and wellness advice, while for 1 in 3, TikTok is the main source of ...
A type of source that is good for scientific information is not usually as reliable for political information, and vice versa. Since Wikipedia's readers may make medical decisions based on information found in our articles, [ 1 ] we want to use high-quality sources when writing about biomedical information.
Medical News Today is a web-based outlet for medical information and news, targeted at both the general public and physicians. All posted content is available online (>250,000 articles as of January 2014), and the earliest available article dates from May 2003. The website was founded in 2003 by Alastair Hazell and Christian Nordqvist. [1]
This page in a nutshell: Cite reviews, don't write them. Appropriate sources for discussing the natural sciences include comprehensive reviews in independent, reliable published sources, such as recent peer reviewed articles in reputable scientific journals, statements and reports from reputable expert bodies, widely recognized standard textbooks written by experts in a field, or standard ...