Talk:Exanthem

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Wikipedia

WikiPedia link to "Viral Rash" (on line commencing Fourth Disease...) appears to be a circular reference back to the same page. Is this consistent with Wikipedia style?

Kevin


Inconsistency

About.com has listed the following principal "classical" exanthems, different from those listed here. 

   * First disease - rubeola
   * Second disease - scarlet fever
   * Third disease - rubella
   * Fourth disease - "Dukes' disease" (probably a coxsackievirus or echovirus infection)
   * Fifth disease - erythema infectiosum
   * Sixth disease - roseola infantum

Jed (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Primary Resource Miscited

I am a first year medical school student whose class is using the 2005 edition of Medical Microbiology by Murray, Rosenthal, & Pfaller. This resource was miscited by a previous Wiki contributor to justify his or her claim that mumps is one of the classic childhood exanthems. Not only do I believe this to be erroneous medically, but it is also demonstrably incorrect (to claim that the text supports this opinion). I have quoted the relevant material from page 700 below to make such a demonstration, as page 700 is what the original Wiki contributor claimed was his or her reference:

The classic childhood exanthems are roseola infantum (exanthem subitum [HHV-6]), fifth disease (erythema infectiosum [parvovirus B19]), and, in unvaccinated children, varicella, measles, and rubella. The rash follows a viremia and is accompanied by fever. Rashes are also caused by enterovirus infections, dengue, and other infections caused by flavivirus or alphaviruses. They are also occasionally seen in patients with infectious mononucleosis.

Please note the following:
1- that the text makes claims about many "occasional" exanthems that did not even warrant being part of "the classic five" (e.g. mono)
2- that mumps did not even make THAT list (i.e. the list of occasional causes of childhood skin disease)
3- that mumps does not typically cause rash or any other dermatologic problems, i.e. it is not an exanthem in the slightest

My claim that the text has been miscited by this user is further supported by page 551 of the same text, where the same five diseases (varicella, rubella, roseola, fifth disease, and measles) are listed and where mumps is nowhere to be found.

I believe that the original Wiki contributor meant well and may possibly be of an older school of thinking. The "classic" childhood exanthems will certainly change as we begin to vaccinate against some more than others; indeed, mumps is a relatively rare childhood disease these days yet was quite common in the mid-20th century. However, it is puzzling that someone would claim mumps as a childhood exanthem when it does not cause a rash to develop in the majority of afflicted patients. (Yes, it has the potential to cause a rash, rarely; this pales in comparison with the hallmark nature of the exanthems in diseases such as varicella (chicken pox) and measles, diseases typified by their exanthemous natures.)

Changes made:
- edited out mumps from its spot as one of the five
- edited in roseola to join the ranks of the five classic exanthems
- clarified that there are some exanthems which don't make the cut and other classic childhood diseases which are not included as they do not cause rash

--128.210.80.225 (talk) 20:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Exanthem. 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) 02:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Exanthem"