CZ:Proposals/Medical Disclaimers: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Robert W King
(To Brian- please do not place replies below the navigation template :P)
imported>David E. Volk
Line 97: Line 97:
[[User:Pierre-Alain Gouanvic|Pierre-Alain Gouanvic]] 17:03, 12 March 2008 (CDT)
[[User:Pierre-Alain Gouanvic|Pierre-Alain Gouanvic]] 17:03, 12 March 2008 (CDT)
:I wouldn't say that. Imagine the peeved doctor who's patient comes to him requesting a prescription based on what the patient read on Citizendium. This phrase does not ''disclaim'' anything! It suggests that Citizendium is telling the patient something that the doctor has neglected, and that the advice of Citizendium can be relied upon (exposing us to liability). [[User:Brian Dean Abramson|Brian Dean Abramson]] 22:02, 12 March 2008 (CDT)
:I wouldn't say that. Imagine the peeved doctor who's patient comes to him requesting a prescription based on what the patient read on Citizendium. This phrase does not ''disclaim'' anything! It suggests that Citizendium is telling the patient something that the doctor has neglected, and that the advice of Citizendium can be relied upon (exposing us to liability). [[User:Brian Dean Abramson|Brian Dean Abramson]] 22:02, 12 March 2008 (CDT)
My personal Phys. loves that we can have a quick well-informed discussions.  I once brought him a new medical article about a week old that he was unaware of, and he had his resident make copies for the whole group.  So, I don't think most physicians get too upset when the patient has some knowledge. [[User:David E. Volk|David E. Volk]] 08:56, 13 March 2008 (CDT)
{{Proposals navigation}}
{{Proposals navigation}}

Revision as of 07:56, 13 March 2008

This proposal has been assigned to the Editorial Council, and is now in the Editorial Council proposals queue.


Driver: David E. Volk

Complete explanation

Proposal to include medical disclaimer phrases on all articles relating to prescription drugs and medical conditions. A suggested possible phrasing:

"This page should not be construed as medical advice. Patients should always discuss medicines and medical conditions with their personal physicians and pharmacists. The intend of this article is to help foster and improve patient/physician discussions."

Reasoning

Whereas, the CZ is not a physician, and

Whereas, medical information changes very quickly, and

Whereas, patients should always discuss medical treatment with personal physician or pharmacist, and

Whereas, the CZ should limit its liability regarding providing medical information to the lay public.

Implementation

Action item 1: A one week discussion within health sciences workgroup members to:

  • refine phrasing
  • decide if phrasing should appear on each page, or only as a link
  • solicite members to write a template for ease of use.

Action item 2: Suggest to proposals manager that this proposal be put to the Editorial Council.

Action item 3: Implement this proposal on all current health science pages.

Action item 4: If feasible, automate the process for all new articles tagged with the Health Science workgroup.

Discussion

At present, authors/editors User:David E. Volk, User:Robert Badgett, and User:Robert W King have indicated support this measure.

I suggest slight changing of the wording so that the target of the disclaimer is not only the lay public, but health care practitioners as well. - Robert Badgett 11:19, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
My strong support for thisGareth Leng 11:27, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
I sent en email to cz-law today, hoping to get input from lawyers as well as health care professionals. David E. Volk 11:47, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
There is no legal requirement that we include disclaimers at all, but if we do it should be kept simple and to the point. The DrugBank example is very good, but we may want to have a simpler link on each page where professional information of any kind is presented, said link leading to a broader general disclaimer page indicating that CZ is not to be regarded as professional advice for medical, legal, accounting, etc. Brian Dean Abramson 12:31, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

Example used on our pages (Life) for approved articles

I see this disclaimer exists on the life article:

  • The Citizendium Foundation and Citizendium participants make no representations about the reliability of this article or its suitability for any purpose.

Is that sufficient, especially with our "press" extolling our reliability versus other sites? David E. Volk 13:09, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

Example disclaimers used by other websites

Canada's Drug Bank

This is the disclamier from the Drug Bank:

  • Disclaimer: The content of DrugBank is intended for educational and scientific research purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

David E. Volk 09:50, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

American College of Physicians

See Obesity: Drug Therapy - Robert Badgett 11:17, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

Other examples

However, once we are approving any (medical) article, the approving editors are actually vouching for the authenticity of the information on the date of approval! Supten Sarbadhikari 02:05, 12 March 2008 (CDT)

Discussion

Open to all.

Of course, of course, of course, for articles being drafted, and this, I'd say, might be just a "bold move" done by medical editors. The proposal's last sentence, however - that is controversial, I'd think. Even if a medical article is perfectly accurate, we want people relying on medical advise from their own physician(s), who has/have legal responsibility for their care, not encyclopedia articles. Stephen Ewen 02:18, 12 March 2008 (CDT)

I personally hate this disclaimer:

"The Citizendium Foundation and Citizendium participants make no representations about the reliability of this article or its suitability for any purpose."

What's the point of even developing an article to the upmost accuracy based on what we know or can find out? There really should be a completely different wording. --Robert W King 09:14, 12 March 2008 (CDT)

The problem I have with that disclaimer is that some CZ participants DO make representations about the reliability of the articles, in newspaper, TV, radio and webpages, and this is contractory to what the above disclaimer says. So citizen John Doe, hears a CZ spokesman touting CZ on the radio, looks up the article on drug XXXX, doesn't see any counterindications for herbal extract YYY, takes a bunch and gets very ill. The pages for XXX and YYY don't list the recently discovered dangerous interaction. Is anyone liable? All authors, only the approving editor? Luckily, I am not a medical editor, so I think my butt is covered. Who wants to approve medical articles? Has ANY medical article been approved yet? David E. Volk 09:51, 12 March 2008 (CDT)

Congratulations for the following :

"The intent of this article is to help foster and improve patient/physician discussions."

I consider that this sentence encapsulates both the legal and CZian imperatives.

I love this disclaimer!

Pierre-Alain Gouanvic 17:03, 12 March 2008 (CDT)

I wouldn't say that. Imagine the peeved doctor who's patient comes to him requesting a prescription based on what the patient read on Citizendium. This phrase does not disclaim anything! It suggests that Citizendium is telling the patient something that the doctor has neglected, and that the advice of Citizendium can be relied upon (exposing us to liability). Brian Dean Abramson 22:02, 12 March 2008 (CDT)

My personal Phys. loves that we can have a quick well-informed discussions. I once brought him a new medical article about a week old that he was unaware of, and he had his resident make copies for the whole group. So, I don't think most physicians get too upset when the patient has some knowledge. David E. Volk 08:56, 13 March 2008 (CDT)

Proposals System Navigation (advanced users only)

Proposal lists (some planned pages are still blank):