Talk:COVID-19: Difference between revisions
→Earlier estimates of IFR: new section |
→Earlier estimates of IFR: fix parentheses |
||
Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
In the section titled ''Earlier estimates of IFR'', the first sentence is: |
In the section titled ''Earlier estimates of IFR'', the first sentence is: |
||
{{Blockquote|text=At an early stage of the pandemic, the World Health Organization reported estimates of IFR between 0.3% and 1%.}} |
{{Blockquote|text=At an early stage of the pandemic, the World Health Organization reported estimates of IFR between 0.3% and 1%.}} |
||
This range (0.3% - 1%) is what is stated in the first reference |
This range (0.3% - 1%) is what is stated in the first reference ([https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200219-sitrep-30-covid-19.pdf WHO Situation Report – 30]), however there was a correction the next day in the second reference ([https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200220-sitrep-31-covid-19.pdf WHO Situation Report – 31]) where they replace the lower bound: |
||
{{Blockquote|text=Since the publication of modeling estimates in yesterday’s ‘Subject in Focus’, one research group (Ref. 12) has provided a correction of their estimate of the Infection-Fatality Ratio (IFR), with the new estimate being 0.94% (95% confidence interval 0.37-2.9). This replaces the lowest estimate of IFR of 0.33%, but remains below the highest estimate of 1.0% (Ref. 11).}} |
{{Blockquote|text=Since the publication of modeling estimates in yesterday’s ‘Subject in Focus’, one research group (Ref. 12) has provided a correction of their estimate of the Infection-Fatality Ratio (IFR), with the new estimate being 0.94% (95% confidence interval 0.37-2.9). This replaces the lowest estimate of IFR of 0.33%, but remains below the highest estimate of 1.0% (Ref. 11).}} |
||
So the range the WHO reported by the end of february 2020 was actually about 0.5% - 1%, if I read the papers that the WHO references correctly. --[[Special:Contributions/78.82.228.158|78.82.228.158]] ([[User talk:78.82.228.158|talk]]) 22:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC) |
So the range the WHO reported by the end of february 2020 was actually about 0.5% - 1%, if I read the papers that the WHO references correctly. --[[Special:Contributions/78.82.228.158|78.82.228.158]] ([[User talk:78.82.228.158|talk]]) 22:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:59, 30 June 2021
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COVID-19 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20Auto-archiving period: 21 days ![]() |
![]() | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | WikiProject COVID-19 consensus WikiProject COVID-19 aims to add to and build consensus for pages relating to COVID-19. They have so far discussed items listed below. Please discuss proposed improvements to them at the project talk page.
To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to . |
![]() | This article is written in Hong Kong English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | A news item involving COVID-19 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 11 March 2020. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
![]() | 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 COVID-19.
|
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
![]() | Other talk page banners | ||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 January 2021 and 12 March 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kris7535 (article contribs).
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COVID-19 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20Auto-archiving period: 21 days ![]() |
Possible infections among WIV researchers in November 2019
This article, published on June 3, 2021, says the following:
- Three researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, all connected with gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, had fallen ill in November 2019 and appeared to have visited the hospital with symptoms similar to COVID-19...
- While it is not clear what had sickened them, “these were not the janitors,” said the former State Department official. “They were active researchers. The dates were among the absolute most arresting part of the picture, because they are smack where they would be if this was the origin.” The reaction inside the State Department was, “Holy shit,” one former senior official recalled. “We should probably tell our bosses.” The investigation roared back to life.
Should information about this be added to this article? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 07:04, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- No. This is not disease-specific, but is probably being discussed at Talk:Investigations into the origin of COVID-19. Alexbrn (talk) 07:08, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 June 2021
![]() | It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at COVID-19. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |
At the end of the first paragraph of the Pathophysiology section, please add "An envelope protein on COVID-19, as well as providing integrity to the virus, disrupts integrity of the cell-junction proteins in human lung tissue, triggering inflammation and creating opportunities for the virus to enter the blood via the damaged lung tissue." (Or, feel free to workshop this a bit if you want.)
Source: Owens, Brian (June 8, 2021). "How the Coronavirus Attacks the Lungs -- and How We May Be Able to Stop the Damage". Inside Science. Retrieved June 9, 2021. (this source also links to the Nature Communications paper) 92.24.246.11 (talk) 20:53, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: The paper in question, referenced in the above source: [1], and its peer review comments: [2] A S U K I T E 23:13, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 June 2021
![]() | It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at COVID-19. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |
The article currently says The virus can cause acute myocardial injury and chronic damage to the cardiovascular system. An acute cardiac injury was found in 12% of infected people admitted to the hospital in Wuhan, China, and is more frequent in severe disease
. It focus too much on acute injury, and has no information on non-acute cardiac injury. I prefer this wording SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to cardiac injury and dysfunction in 20%–30% of hospitalized patients (Guo et al., 2020) and higher rates of mortality in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease (Shi et al., 2020; Wu and McGoogan, 2020).
. The quote is from this source.[1]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Forich (talk • contribs) 04:04, 10 June 2021
References
- ^ Mills, Richard J.; Humphrey, Sean J.; Fortuna, Patrick R.J.; Lor, Mary; Foster, Simon R.; Quaife-Ryan, Gregory A.; Johnston, Rebecca L.; Dumenil, Troy; Bishop, Cameron; Rudraraju, Rajeev; Rawle, Daniel J.; Le, Thuy; Zhao, Wei; Lee, Leo; Mackenzie-Kludas, Charley; Mehdiabadi, Neda R.; Halliday, Christopher; Gilham, Dean; Fu, Li; Nicholls, Stephen J.; Johansson, Jan; Sweeney, Michael; Wong, Norman C.W.; Kulikowski, Ewelina; Sokolowski, Kamil A.; Tse, Brian W.C.; Devilée, Lynn; Voges, Holly K.; Reynolds, Liam T.; Krumeich, Sophie; Mathieson, Ellen; Abu-Bonsrah, Dad; Karavendzas, Kathy; Griffen, Brendan; Titmarsh, Drew; Elliott, David A.; McMahon, James; Suhrbier, Andreas; Subbarao, Kanta; Porrello, Enzo R.; Smyth, Mark J.; Engwerda, Christian R.; MacDonald, Kelli P.A.; Bald, Tobias; James, David E.; Hudson, James E. (April 2021). "BET inhibition blocks inflammation-induced cardiac dysfunction and SARS-CoV-2 infection". Cell. 184 (8): 2167–2182.e22. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.026.
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 June 2021
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the word infectious to contagious 2A00:23C6:748F:2F00:E135:3EFF:DBC:506F (talk) 08:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The word "infectious" appears 25 times in the article; please specify the sentence where you want it changed. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 22:21, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Edit request
Can someone please update the upper end of the duration (which currently says 10+ months) to 14 months known? A recently published article can be used as a source. I don't have the requisite number of edits to make this change myself (which is ironic, because this would be an edit of mine…quite the catch 22)
theZcuber (talk) 08:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- TheZcuber, we'd probably need a WP:MEDRS citation for this. Maybe something from this PubMed search query would help. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:53, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Given that there's currently no reference whatsoever, how would a news article from an otherwise reputable source not be an improvement? It's not like the claim is in dispute. theZcuber (talk) 11:24, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
WHO nomenclature for variants - Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta
Could someone edit the variants section and add information of WHO nomenclature of variants? The source from the WHO website is here - https://www.who.int/en/activities/tracking-SARS-CoV-2-variants/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbdulKareem92 (talk • contribs) 08:15, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Earlier estimates of IFR
In the section titled Earlier estimates of IFR, the first sentence is:
At an early stage of the pandemic, the World Health Organization reported estimates of IFR between 0.3% and 1%.
This range (0.3% - 1%) is what is stated in the first reference (WHO Situation Report – 30), however there was a correction the next day in the second reference (WHO Situation Report – 31) where they replace the lower bound:
Since the publication of modeling estimates in yesterday’s ‘Subject in Focus’, one research group (Ref. 12) has provided a correction of their estimate of the Infection-Fatality Ratio (IFR), with the new estimate being 0.94% (95% confidence interval 0.37-2.9). This replaces the lowest estimate of IFR of 0.33%, but remains below the highest estimate of 1.0% (Ref. 11).
So the range the WHO reported by the end of february 2020 was actually about 0.5% - 1%, if I read the papers that the WHO references correctly. --78.82.228.158 (talk) 22:57, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles that use Hong Kong English
- Wikipedia In the news articles
- B-Class COVID-19 articles
- Top-importance COVID-19 articles
- WikiProject COVID-19 articles
- B-Class Disaster management articles
- Top-importance Disaster management articles
- B-Class medicine articles
- Top-importance medicine articles
- B-Class emergency medicine and EMS articles
- Top-importance emergency medicine and EMS articles
- Emergency medicine and EMS task force articles
- B-Class society and medicine articles
- Top-importance society and medicine articles
- Society and medicine task force articles
- B-Class pulmonology articles
- High-importance pulmonology articles
- Pulmonology task force articles
- All WikiProject Medicine pages
- B-Class Molecular Biology articles
- High-importance Molecular Biology articles
- All WikiProject Molecular Biology pages
- B-Class virus articles
- Top-importance virus articles
- WikiProject Viruses articles
- Unassessed China-related articles
- Unknown-importance China-related articles
- Unassessed China-related articles of Unknown-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press
- Wikipedia extended-confirmed-protected edit requests