Talk:Bromfenac

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Impartial information needed

The article says "While we keep up with the latest advances in surgical technique, biometry, instrumentation, and technique, it’s important to remember that for every patient the only thing that matters is the final visual outcome. And that requires patients to modulate their healing response by treating post-operative inflammation with a potent, safe, and efficacious NSAID like Bromday." This sounds like a sales pitch that does not belong in Wikipedia. The words "While we keep up" imply that the article was written from the manufacturer's viewpoint, which hardly is an impartial perspective.

I inserted this comment because Bromday was prescribed for me at significant costs, and I wanted to know about alternatives. So an impartial article would have been very useful to me. Paul Abrahams (talk) 17:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Paul Abrahams[reply]

"Modern day cataract surgery has evolved into a procedure that is safe, efficient, and minimally invasive, with the ability to restore excellent vision to our patients. The ultimate visual result is a combination of our surgical skill along with the patient’s healing response. And this is where NSAIDs are of benefit: to treat the post-operative inflammation as well as any potential pain after cataract surgery." The tone of this paragraph is so far from neutral that it should be deleted. Stick to the info. Drop the professional cheer leading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyecheck (talkcontribs) 15:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. A good portion of this page looks like it was copy/pasted from the manufacturer's sales pitch to health personel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.7.228.252 (talk) 22:46, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bromfenac. 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) 10:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]