Talk:Zebra (medicine)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
this
[edit]this article is textually the same as http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Zebra-(medical) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.82.178.148 (talk) 05:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Very true indeed. :-) But as they say on their page: The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL. -- Momotaro (talk) 09:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I find the part under the statement "Three master diagnosticians have noted, however..." to be nothing more than a ridiculously pretentious re-statement of a simple statistical principle. By analogy: if you have been struck by a moving vehicle, the fact that only 1 in 10,000 are likely to be struck by a moving vehicle is pretty much irrelevant.
-- Jane Q. Public (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:58, 21 November 2010 (UTC).
- And yet you would be surprised how infrequently most physicians think this way, especially in the era of practice guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.195.90.244 (talk) 06:50, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- We are talking about diagnosis. Is someone seriously suggesting that if the patient has clearly been hit by a large object it is irrelevant whether he lives on a busy road or lives miles from any road? Those criteria are reflected in statistics, and they ARE relevant! 78.147.18.59 (talk) 16:34, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
References
[edit]What does "Sotos (2006) page 15." refer to? 72.65.51.43 (talk) 05:24, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
- In the article's bibliography section at the bottom of the page it says: Sotos, John G. (2006) [1991]. Zebra Cards: An Aid to Obscure Diagnoses. Mt. Vernon, VA: Mt. Vernon Book Systems. ISBN 978-0-9818193-0-3. — tbc (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Zebra medicine image
[edit]What would the leading image for zebra medicine term be, if we could get one? A picture of a literal zebra probably would be not appropriate. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 04:47, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- I've seen ribbons with zebra pattern. Like an awareness ribbons. Nakonana (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
- It's actually a thing: Zebra print ribbon. Nakonana (talk) 19:35, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Quote at end of Introduction
[edit]The statement that "calculations of probability have no meaning" and more egregiously "Whether it is rare or common does not change the odds in a single patient" are quite wrong. The quote is just a Base rate fallacy. Should this at least be mentioned next to the quote? I.Elgamal (talk) 20:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
The quote is wrong.
[edit]I have it second hand from someone who was a med student under Dr Theodore Woodward at Johns Hopkins, and I'm still looking for the attributed version, but the correct original quote zie posted is within 5% of:
"When you hear hoofbeats behind you on Greene St, you expect horses, not zebras... but a zebra it may well be."
The street address of Johns Hopkins is #10 Greene St, Googlemaps tells me.
Clearly that's not enough attribution to put the quote *in* the article, but since Dr Woodward is being cited to have said *the exact opposite thing from what he's quoted as having said* -- to wit: that you should *think about zebras*, not dismiss them -- and since we are cited as many people's source for this, we might perhaps reconsider how this is written and/or whether we should include the current attribution? (I have the citation and I *will* find it, but this is front of mind just now and I didn't want to forget.)
-- baylink@en.wp Baylink (talk) 03:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC)