Template talk:Infobox drug

This is the discussion/talk page for: Template:Drugbox.

Archives
Sep 2005 - Jan 2007 Jan 2007 - Dec 2007 Jan 2008 - Dec 2008

Topics from 2009

Line wrap in IUPAC names

Is there a way to make the drugbox recognize separators, such it can correctly wrap long names. As it is, long names horizontally expand the drugbox to huge size, such that it displays funny. I have now inserted spaces into the names behind dashes and that works nicely. But anyway, do we have the possibility of having automatic line wrap of similar functionality? 70.137.139.73 (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I've not seen any line wrap problems for a long time. We certainly used to have them, and fixed them by adding hard HTML line-breaks where needed. At present, the {{chembox}} is fixed at 30% width, rather than the 280px wdith for the drugbox – from memory, this was because of the line wrap problem. This is one example of a chembox with an extremely long IUPAC name which used to look really awful.

The problem with adding spaces after each hyphen is that such spaces do not appear in the real name. Indeed, hyphens in a chemical name are not always the best place to 'hyphenate' it! "2-Propanol" should be hyphenated as "2-prop/-an/-ol", for example, never to leave the "2-" at the end of the line. Physchim62 (talk) 11:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

For the chembox the problem has been fixed by making the IUPAC name hidden by default. See WT:CHEM for discussion. Xasodfuih (talk) 18:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I indeed made the IUPAC name hidden in the chembox, like we did with InChI and SMILES there. Most of them are pretty unreadable anyway, but we can't leave them out. This solves problems with displaying of the page as it loads (if you show the long name it will still do bad thing to your layout ..), while still having searchability intact, and screen readers should also have no problems with this (it might even improve that).

Optimal would be to hide everything that is longer than, say, 30 characters, but StringFunctions is not enabled on en wiki (and a developer did not sound to hopeful that it would be enabled). Should we implement this also in this box? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 20:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I guess so. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Support. --Arcadian (talk) 22:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Not sure, see discussion on talk chemicals. [1] The alternative names and pidgin iupac/nonsystematic/pharmacist iupac names common in literature have the same problem, and lists of them even more. And we can't turn everything into hide- and scrollbars. After all the chem literature also manages to maintain free layout for readability and page layout considerations in their books and periodicals. Also nomenclature in literature is far from standardized see Pubchem names vs. IUPAC, use of icosa vs. eicosa in IUPAC and Beilstein, Chem Abstracts and generally publicized materials. So I am afraid the machine readability and searchability is a wild goose chase or to be solved on the level of indexing and search algorithms and related lexical and eventually semantic preprocessing. Think of a chem search bar. 70.137.173.82 (talk) 11:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

The problem is mainly with the IUPACName, and just to a lesser extend for some of the other names (there are some that are way too long, but not too many, and not many pages x not too many users makes me a bit reluctant to solve those as well; maybe we can wrap the long ones in the template, not making the template do it for all). That other sites don't follow proper IUPAC naming (and indeed the question is 'what is proper') is not a reason to not try here to do it correctly; if more sites do try to become more correct, then we are ready for it, we don't have to go through thousands of pages here to 'make them correct, but in a broken format', and then again go through them in some time to 'repair the broken format'. I have tried to summarise the problem a bit on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 12:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Aaaaah! "Fixed" it adding line breaks... Doesn't seem right though. Horus (talk) 00:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Vaccines

Can we create a variant optimized for vaccines (as was done for antibodies)? --Arcadian (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll plan on creating this soon, unless there are objections or alternate suggestions. --Arcadian (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Suppose so, what had you in mind ? David Ruben ^Talk 02:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Drop the "Pharmacokinetic data" and "Pharmacokinetic data" sections, and add a new section dedicated to vaccine-only properties (target, live/inactivated/toxoid/subunit, number needed to vaccinate). For MMR vaccine and the like, I think we should use the combination drugbox, rather than make a combination version of a vaccine infobox. --Arcadian (talk) 04:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

OK initial trial coding at {{Drugbox/sandbox}} - needs robust testing at some point to ensure it does what it is supposed to when "type=vaccine", and also check I've not disrupted coding for other "types". It takes (so far) parameters:

• target - ie the virus. This is a shared parameter also being used when "type=mab". Should it be automatically wikilinked here, eg enter "target=Hepatitis B vaccine" or "target=[[Hepatitis B vaccine]]" ?
• vaccine_type - I've currently set to recognise only a select list of options, in order to ensure consitant terminology and also wikilinking to correct article. Options are per Vaccine#Types and aside from some additional synonyms are in essence: Killed / Live or Attenuated / Toxoid / Subunit / Conjugate / Recombinant / DNA
• What does number needed to vaccinate (which redirects to Number needed to treat) mean in this context ? Do you mean degree of protection ? If so, that is normally given as a percentage, eg Hepatitis B vaccine#Response to vaccination states "a full response occurs in about 85-90% of individuals"

I should point out I have very little time to work on this as I shall be on holiday from next week. David Ruben ^Talk 00:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks good. I agree about number needed to vaccinate (and references would be needed to provide additional nuance). If there is no objection in the next seven days, I think we can move forward with your design (with or without NNV). --Arcadian (talk) 02:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

What of the issue whether or not target auto-wikilinks ? Would be simpler if no need to have editor add the square brackets, but I wonder if alternative display text (ie "[[virus|alt display]]") would be occasionally useful ? Also the section header of Vaccine needs perhaps rephrasing, eg Vaccine details ? David Ruben ^Talk 04:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd recommend not auto-wikilinking for now. I can imagine some scenarios where a vaccine target wouldn't necessarily map to a single existing page. --Arcadian (talk) 04:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

OK. Also I've made slight a tweak to the sandbox, making the section header read "Vaccine description", to see what anyone thought ("Vaccine details" seemed too specific and would be all the extra stuff like legal details, pregnancy usage etc etc, rather than this overview of what type of vaccine and what target), but "Vaccine outline", "Vaccine overview" are alternatives. (Holiday flight cancelled per BBC News, so a further day sitting at home). David Ruben ^Talk 19:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Sandbox Example 1

Hepatitis B vaccine

Vaccine description
Target	Hepatitis B
Vaccine type	Subunit

{{Drugbox/sandbox
| drug_name         = Hepatitis B vaccine
| type              = vaccine
| image             = 
| target            = [[Hepatitis B]]
| vaccine_type      = subunit
| CAS_number        = 
| ATC_prefix        = 
| ATC_suffix        = 
| PubChem           = 
| DrugBank          = 
| pregnancy_AU      =  <!-- A / B1 / B2 / B3 / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_US      =  <!-- A / B            / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_category=  
| legal_AU =  <!-- S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9 or Unscheduled-->
| legal_CA =  <!-- Schedule I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII -->
| legal_UK =  <!-- GSL, P, POM, CD, or Class A, B, C -->
| legal_US =  <!-- OTC / Rx-only / Schedule I, II, III, IV, V -->
| legal_status      = 
| routes_of_administration = 
}}

Sandbox Example 2

Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine

Vaccine description
Target	Streptococcus pneumoniae
Vaccine type	Conjugate
Clinical data
ATC code	J07AL01 (WHO)

{{Drugbox/sandbox
| drug_name         = Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 
| type              = vaccine
| image             = 
| target            = [[Streptococcus pneumoniae]]
| vaccine_type      = conjugate
| CAS_number        = 
| ATC_prefix        = J07
| ATC_suffix        = AL01 
| PubChem           = 
| DrugBank          = 
| pregnancy_AU      =  <!-- A / B1 / B2 / B3 / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_US      =  <!-- A / B            / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_category=  
| legal_AU =  <!-- S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9 or Unscheduled-->
| legal_CA =  <!-- Schedule I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII -->
| legal_UK =  <!-- GSL, P, POM, CD, or Class A, B, C -->
| legal_US =  <!-- OTC / Rx-only / Schedule I, II, III, IV, V -->
| legal_status      = 
| routes_of_administration = 
}}

 Done - having realised that header for target should not specify "virus target" as not all vaccines are against viruses - doh ! Infobox template documentation added and see example at Hepatitis B vaccine (unneceassary parameters removed). David Ruben ^Talk 19:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I wonder though, is "live attenuated" just for viruses - ie are there any bacterial or protozoal examples ? If so then "attenuated" perhaps should point for "attenuated virus", and "Live" imply bacterial agents ? David Ruben ^Talk 19:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Per Immunology at Google Books, page 420, yes. (Use the "Search in this book" feature on the phrase "Attenuated viruses and bacteria cause immunity without disease".) Both bacterial and viral vaccines have inactivated and live attenuated forms. For bacterial vaccines, inactivated types include anthrax, cholera, pertussis, and plague, while live attenuated types include tuberculosis and typhoid. --Arcadian (talk) 23:58, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm. Inacitvate is current "killed" option, we just need show as "inactivated/killed". The attenuated though at least for viruses has a target page of Attenuated virus, but no equivalent target of attenuated bacteria. I'll suggest a proposed distinction of "attenuated" for virus and "live" for bacteria (viruses not 'live' as such until infect). David Ruben ^Talk 04:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Silver in chemical formula

Could an admin, please, modify the template so that it supports Ag? (See Silver sulfadiazine.) Thank you --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 21:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done I used   for the color because, well because it's silver:) I edited the drugbox you mentioned to use it...color looks a little too light when displayed in the box, but not too bad IMO. If you find a better rgb coordinate, let us know! DMacks (talk) 21:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks good (per CPK coloring and this). Should we also add antimony (Sb), to support drugs like sodium stibogluconate? --Arcadian (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually far too light against the light grey of the template box, even I had difficult seeing silver against teh grey, so I've darkened to   David Ruben ^Talk 22:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Of course, why not? (Are there any reasons not to add all elements, except that it would be a lot of work?) --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 10:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Also would bloat out the template, plus there is just never going to be a Plutonium containing pharmaceutical or any of the other shortlived radionucleides. It has been on my to-do list (for far too long) to try and create a subtemplate for Hill system creation (ie Carbon, Hydrogen and then the rest in alphabetical order - except all in alphabetical order if no carbon, i.e. the hydrogen moves location). As a template, that might have a wider use in chemical articles as well as drugs. David Ruben ^Talk 19:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Synonyms

This is a minor point about organization ... currently the "synonyms" field shows up under the "chemical data" heading, but it would make better sense to have it under the "identifiers" heading. Can it be moved? -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Molecular mass

Some drug articles give the molecular mass without the unit (g/mol), some include it, sometimes wikilinked, sometimes not... Could this be unified, for example by adding "g/mol" automatically (as with the physical properties)? This would probably need a bot to remove all the units from the transclusions, though. Thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

MOA and better advertisement of adding "class" in currently used drugbox

Hello, I've suggested in the past http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Drugbox/Archive_3#class_of_drug_or_mechanism that MOA be added to the drugbox. I was shot down for lack of space. I would like to refer you to epocrates professional version if you have access. In a very short phrase, they are able to add the Mechanism of Action in their short line. I think we can do it to. Obviously there needs to be a lengthly prose explanation of the MOA in the article and it should always be a subcategory of the article. My other comment is about the "class" feature which is VERY underused in the drugbox. Linking articles by class is very important. However I never see it in articles even though it could be added. I am awful with templates and hope that someone else takes the initiative to incorporate these suggestions. I thank you for your time and ear. Please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Drugbox#Combination_products and