|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dementia article.|
|Dementia has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Science. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|This article 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 Dementia.
Suggestions for more content
What about Wernicke's encephalopathy, and Korsakoff's syndrome?
And I happen to be looking for a full list of the aetiology of dementia. Would be very grateful for any pointers/links to such a list.
With regards to disorientation I'm taking the week part out of time - it's disorientation to not know the day of the week, maybe day of the month, but how many people can tell you which week of the year it is?
Cerebral Health Website
As director of the cerebralhealth.com website, I would like to offer an appeal to the editors of this page to include a link to either the homepage at http://www.cerebralhealth.com or to the Brain Research and Information Network (B.R.A.I.N.) at http://www.cerebralhealth.com/neuroscienceresearch.php
None of these references mentions dementia "However, the head of the National Institute of Mental Health, Thomas Insel, has stated that the DSM-5 lacks scientific validity and has since directed all NIMH research away from it." Thus IMO this is inappropriate here. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- This is WP:Undue weight. IP, look at what WP:Due weight states about the different forms of WP:Undue weight. Criticism of the DSM-5 is made clear in its Wikipedia article. Flyer22 (talk) 22:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Regarding DSM-5 and the way it is being presented
Here is the problem: Psychiatry is in fact not the field of medicine that specializes in research or treatment of dementia. Yet the DSM-5 is being introduced to the reader in the context of “what is dementia?”. I think that most reasonable and unbiased people would agree that only those qualified and specializing in a disease should be considered credible when educating people as to what it is. In this case, that would be neurology. I think most people would agree that this makes the reader inclined to think that psychiatry does indeed specialize in dementia, which makes the mention of the DSM-5 seem much more like it was planted there by someone with a pro-psychiatry bias, but is inappropriate in that context because its implication is both misleading and inaccurate. I would have no objection to the DSM-5 being introduced in another section of the article concerning behavioral health and comorbid disorders. However, it will not be my job to do because I have already made my contribution, and it was both sourced and reasonable. Considering that my contribution is in fact sourced and relevant in context, it should not be removed until the issues I’ve raised are resolved. My contribution may be a bit boorish, but it indeed balances the bias and is good enough until someone else finds a better way to do it. And this is the whole spirit of wikipedia, mind you. To revise and grow, not to bicker and destroy. If you can not find a way to improve my contribution, add to it or otherwise nullify its purpose, then please just leave it alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:28, 7 March 2015 (UTC)