Talk:Braxton Hicks contractions

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Reproductive medicine task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Women's Health Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the 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 Braxton Hicks contractions.

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2021 and 21 September 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Medits24, Simc823.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

This really ought to be called "Braxton Hicks Contractions" as that is the formal name and if you search under that name you can't find a page.

The sentence "It has since been found that Braxton Hicks' contractions are much less noticeable during exercise, whereas real contractions are not" is wrong grammar, and does not make sense. it should not say "not" at the end of it- "B/H is not noticeable during exercise, but real contractions are."

i have removed the bottom text "when should i call my doctor" since i feel an encyclopedia does not have things like this.wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a medical guide.(Akhwandk (talk) 08:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Sources for alleviating factors

The entire "Alleviating factors" section has specific recommendations for alleviating the contractions but has no sources. The information seems questionable at best. --TaviRider (talk) 20:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it 'incorrect' to call it "false labo(u)r"?

Wikipedia re-directs both "false labour" and "false labor" here. If the phrase "false labo(u)r" refers to a phenomenon that is not the same as Braxton Hicks contractions, then why is there no Wikipedia article on that other phenomenon? Since Braxton Hicks contractions feel like labo(u)r but aren't, it would be correct to refer to Braxton Hicks contractions as "false labo(u)r" UNLESS there is some other phenomenon that is different from Braxton Hicks contractions for which the term "false labo(u)r" is formally reserved. (If a plant looks enough like clover that many people will believe it is clover, but it is not clover, it is correct to call it "false clover" UNLESS there is a specific taxon of plant FORMALLY named "false clover", to the exclusion of other plants that look like clover sufficiently to fool people.) I'm not saying Braxton Hicks contractions are the same as false labo(u)r. I'm saying that the assertion that it is "incorrect" to refer to Braxton Hicks contractions as false labo(u)r is insufficiently sourced/explained unless there is more information about a phenomenon that is not Braxton Hicks contractions but is "correctly" called "false labo(u)r".2604:2000:C6AA:B400:DC5E:4DC6:49D6:61D8 (talk) 02:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

History part is false

The history part refers to some singer but it should refer to a medical doctor Aop (talk) 19:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Work Plan

This article could use more information and citations. We plan to use the signs and symptoms Wikipedia template as a guide to reorganize and expand on the following: definition, associated conditions (include a table comparing to "true" labor), pathophysiology, diagnostics, management, epidemiology, and history. Simc823 (talk) 17:50, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the team made the edits that were discussed in class. I have no further editorial comments. --Jacobstringer28 (talk) 02:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)Jacobstringer28[reply]

I thought that the sections are appropriate and set up the core point well i.e. the differences between B.H. contractions and true labor. Strong work! Egakman (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2021 (UTC)(talk) 03:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Generality of the term pregnant

I strongly suggest to be gender neutral whenever possible. The term "pregnant women" is used in medical sources, but so is "pregnant transgender men" or similar ones, see e.g. ^[1].Hence, the use of "pregnant women" is misleading, since pregnant transgender males do also experience contractions. In any case, using the term "pregnant person" is in any case not incorrect. WikiWakaWiking

References

^ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8412429/

[1] ttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8412429/

[1]