Talk:Amniocentesis: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 20:41, 30 July 2019

Medicine: Reproductive C‑class High‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Reproductive medicine task force (assessed as High-importance).

Women's Health Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Women's History Start‑class High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 Amniocentesis.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 July 2019 and 23 August 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Francesca.alcala.96, Mvirk422, Vivianle17 (article contribs).

Amniocentesis and stem cells section

I've added a general cleanup template to this section. I don't question the intentions of the author of this section, but it should probably be worded more carefully and subtly, so as to avoid potential POV or factual problems. Thanks. Naptastic (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The

The entire risk section needs to be cited from something. Who knows if anything there is valid?

The PROCEDURE section seems to be casually worded, especially in the last sentence (...You or your doctor...)Derekbd 00:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added { { Refimprove } } tag.Derekbd 01:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding

Regarding the risks of amniocentesis. I am not an expert but I have read a note at the gynecologist's where the management of the hospital asked doctors to inform patients about the 2% risk of miscarriage after amniocentesis. Before that the official number was 1%. They even stated they did 200 tests last year and had 3 miscarriages as a direct result and 1 as a more complicated but related reason. Please somebody get this right and include the sources. I think it is important. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drevokocur (talk • contribs) 11:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have read a while ago (a study) that the complications rate varies with the physician's experience, and the numbers they cited varied widely, and could have explained the 2% vs. 0.5% difference. The new 0.06% number is new, and may have been obtained in a specialty clinic with high throughput.Milliemchi (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A note at the Gynecologists that you read once and remember is hardly evidence of a conclusive study. It could just be that one of the doctors at that one hospital were careless, or any number of things.Pstanton 23:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

There's a discrepancy between the figures on this article and the chorionic villus sampling article. The CVS one says that they're effectively as safe as each other, whereas this article says CVS is more dangerous (which doesn't tally with the figures given on the CVS page). Brammers (talk) 09:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the Pain section

Done Get rid of the Pain section, its 2 short sentences, and the information isn't cited and pretty dubious in any case. Pstanton 00:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs)

Amniocentesis for lung maturity

The article does not mention the use of amniocentesis to test for lung maturity when there is a possibility of preterm delivery. This should be added.Milliemchi (talk) 20:22, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Amniocentesis (sex-selection)

In the Encyclopedia of International Development (ed Tim Forsyth Routledge 2005) there is an entry on Amniocentesis (sex-selection). The entry argues that Amniocentesis has become prevalent in some cultures (China and India are mentioned). The results of the test are then used as the basis for decisions about abortion. Using Amniocentesis to aid sex-selection is then a major contributor to there being millions of missing women. Would there be any problems with me adding something about this? (Msrasnw (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Post procedure care section requested

There is a request at Requested articles for a page on post procedure care after Amnio. I think that should redirect here, but there isn't any discussion of that. It is needed. BakerStMD T|C 20:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amniocentesis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516200040/http://www.health.harvard.edu/diagnostic-tests/amniosentesis.htm to http://www.health.harvard.edu/diagnostic-tests/amniosentesis.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:28, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amniocentesis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foundations 2, Group 8c Goals

Our goals include: - Revising the introduction paragraph to make defining the procedure read more smoothly - Creating a history section to flesh out the origin and development of amniocenteses - Validate the risk section with sources and include recent additions - Elaborate on the "Procedure" section to include more in depth description of the procedure as well as pre and post considerations when electing to have an amniocentesis performed - Reformat the "Medical Uses" section to categorize uses based on condition/organ system - Elaborate on the stem cells section to provide information about what can/has been done in regards to stems cells derived via amniocentesis

205.154.255.164 (talk) 20:41, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]