Wikipedia often omits important drug information: study | Reuters
Wikipedia often omits important drug information: study | Reuters
Here’s an intersting study that confirms what I have long written about regarding Wikipedia. The article reports on a study of the Wikipedia articles related to 80 drugs. It finds that, while the information contained in the articles are generally and remarkably accurate, these articles often omit important infomration. The wisdom of crowds is really good at aggregating the knowledge the crowd does possess, but it is often not as good at identifying what it doesn’t know.
2 comments so far
Leave a reply
I concur with the article/study. Earlier this semester I found major errors in the articles for the pharmaceuticals that I represent. So at a recent convention I asked one of the product managers why the company didn’t edit/monitor wikipedia articles. He didn’t know the answer and he didn’t know if the company had even addressed this issue but thought if they had…they were probably staying away b/c of legal ramifications and/or ethical issues (might be seen as promotional).
What is really scary but sort of a self-perpetuating cycle is how frequently people do turn to the internet instead of a qualified MD for medical information. On the basic level, it makes sense to google a condition you’ve noticed or drugs you’ve heard of, since it can be tough and time-consuming to get in touch with a doctor. The internet is millions of times faster than locating a doc by pager, appointment, or–if you’re lucky–email. Most of us spend almost all day in front of a computer and the infinite bounds of internet answers are just a click away. However, there is such high potential for faulty information online, which can lead to mass hysteria and crazy blog posting. A qualified MD could answer medical questions accurately and disspell any concerns, but in a time when patience is about as popular as tape walkmans, getting info fast (even if it is faulty) takes priority.