Talk:Gastritis

Copyrighted

Please stop adding that copyrighted block of text (already linked to in external link) to the article. I have given you multiple pointers to relevant pages like Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Articles with copyright violation text are regularly deleted from Wikipedia. Users who continue to post copyright violation material after warnings may be blocked from editing. -- Infrogmation 23:17, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC) I was diagnosed with Gastritis. While in the hospital a tube was put down my nose into my stomach where blood was present. An endoscopy was done the next day and although there was no blood in the asophogus I was told this was the reason for the blood and vomiting.this does not sound right to me.any info. that someone could give me would be appreciated.----

gastric mucus gel layer and gastritis

Has anyone come across evidence that colonization by a microorganism in the mucus gel layer of the stomach induces infiltration of immune cells in the mucus gel? I've seen reports on the in vivo distribution of H. felis in the mucus gel of mice and that it induces mild gastritis, but it is unclear in the document where these immune cells are. Gludwiczak 21:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

adding link

I add link for granulomatous gastritis since this article havent been written on wikipedia Kuplukjaya (talk) 07:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Student Input

Potential References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40]

Sorry about the late references...I didn't think the references where due until next Monday.--Llamoedu (talk) 01:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

---

Graded --JimmyButler (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

---

I don't mind if other people edit this page, but if you do, PLEASE CITE IT.

Also, I have put this article up for peer review, so if you would like to review the article, I encourage you to do so. Thanks!--Llamoedu (talk) 23:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Classification and a review

The article breaks down gastritis into erosive vs non erosive. The issue is much more complicated than this. "CLASSIFICATION OF GASTRITIS AND GASTROPATHY — Several classifications of gastritis and gastropathy (such as the Sydney system) [5] have been proposed [5-10]. However, classification remains controversial because of gaps in knowledge of etiology and pathogenesis, variation in nomenclature, and the coexistence of more than one type of gastritis or gastropathy in individual patients. Thus, comparisons across studies using different nomenclature can be difficult. Most classification systems distinguish acute, short-term from chronic, long-term disease. The terms acute and chronic are also used to describe the type of inflammatory cell infiltrate. Acute inflammation is usually associated with neutrophilic infiltration, while chronic inflammation is usually characterized by mononuclear cells, chiefly lymphocytes, plasma cells, and macrophages. A practical clinicopathologic framework for the classification of gastritis and gastropathy based upon these factors can be proposed (show table 1) [8]."http://www.uptodate.com/online/content/topic.do?topicKey=acidpep/7980&selectedTitle=2~150&source=search_result

It then adds H. Pylori to the non erosive category. The ref however says "H. pylori bacteria grow in the protective mucus layer of the stomach lining, where they are less exposed to the highly acidic juices produced by the stomach. Virtually all people who have H. pylori infection have gastritis, which may affect the entire stomach or only the lower part (antrum). Infection can sometimes lead to erosive gastritis. H. pylori contributes to ulcer formation by increasing acid production, interfering with the normal defenses against stomach acid, and producing toxins."http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec09/ch121/ch121b.html

This page is dealing with a medical disease which mean the data on the topic is huge. And many of the references should refer to peer reviewed and published academic papers. Pubmed is a great source for abstract and will sometime give you the whole copy free. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez

"Other medicine" in the lead is very vague... Are we talking antibiotics? Are we taking H2 blockers, PPI...

No mention is made about cancer. "Metaplasia is highly relevant to the pathogenesis of atrophic gastritis and to its complications (eg, pernicious anemia, gastric ulcer, and gastric cancer)." --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Tool for formatting references

http://diberri.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/templatefiller/index.cgi?ddb=&type=pubmed_id

Section on history and how this intersects with culture

The little purple pill http://www.purplepill.com/ is one of the most highly advertised drugs in the would.

The term is also often know as heart burn and Acid indigestion and is closely related to GERD.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes, esomeprazole. How-to-market-a-stereoisomer-and-suggest-it-is-much-better-than-the-racemic-mixture. JFW | T@lk 14:45, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Exactly :-) My main point is that there is history and culture here to discuss.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

POV

One needs to write from a neutral POV. When one says "doctors may recommend". This is from the patients POV and should be avoided. One should rather say for example that PPI have been found to help however many people they help, but there are concerns about C. dif for example.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Sections the article should contain

As per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(medicine-related_articles)#Diseases.2Fdisorders.2Fsyndromes these are the section the article is currently missing.

1. Classification
2. Signs
3. Pathophysiology or Mechanism
4. Prevention or Screening
5. Prognosis
6. Epidemiology
7. History (not patient history)
8. Society and culture (e.g., stigma, economics, religious aspects, awareness, legal issues)

Cheers. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

These are the requirements for FA, they can be added as the article is expanded, but they are not part of the GA criteria. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:19, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Graham, I agree but James' comment does indicate that there are some significant shortcomings to the article. JFW | T@lk 14:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I consider that for a topic to be covered broadly, which is a GA criteria, one must touch on all of these to some degree. There is a great deal of good sources available. I have commented on other concerns above.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Not currently suitable

I would strongly advise against this article being made GA. For one thing, the references are completely unsuitable per WP:MEDRS. Some of the language employed is overly lay-oriented (e.g. the use of "B12 shots" for vitamin B12 injections). Essential topics and terms are not covered, e.g. the concept of melaena is alluded to but the term is not identified. JFW | T@lk 14:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

About the reliability of the sources, if someone could tell me which ones, I will try and look for a more reliable source, such as from PubMed or a government site, that restates the information, or even if contradicts it. Thanks!--Llamoedu (talk) 04:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC) 04:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, it would be important to discuss whether chronic gastritis predisposes to gastric cancer. JFW | T@lk 14:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Agree and as this article still requires significant work I will have to fail at this point in time. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Free full-text references

Here are some references, mainly reviews, from PubMed Central. They are free and full text copies can be downloaded.

• Helicobacter species
• Gastric cancer
• Gastric cancer
• Gastric cancer
• Reflux disease
• Gastric adenocarcinoma a review
• Dyspepsia in primary care: review of the literature
• Helicobacter pylori and functional dyspepsia: review of previous studies and commentary on new data
• Pathogenesis of Helicobacter pylori Infection
• Smoking, alcohol, and analgesics in dyspepsia and among dyspepsia subgroups Large File
• The use of proton pump inhibitors for gastric acid suppression in critical illness
• Adenocarcinoma of the stomach: a review
• The morphology of gastritis
• Erosive gastritis. with special reference to the role of aspirin and bile
• Campylobacter pyloridis, gastritis, and peptic ulceration

Graham Colm ^Talk 17:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Citation Help

Could someone tell me how to make one citation used multiple times in an article not look like two or three different citations? I believe I have done this once or twice in my article. I have one citation listed multiple times in my Citations section. Thanks!--Llamoedu (talk) 04:14, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

• Hi, sorry for the delay in replying. This is a good question, it took me ages to discover the trick. It is done like this:

Give the reference a name e.g. <ref name="anyname">

First time (or once in the article), all the details at once <ref name="name"> {{cite journal |author= |title= |journal= |volume= |issue= |pages= |year= |pmid= |doi= }}</ref>

Then just <ref name="name"/> from then on. Graham Colm ^Talk 16:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Improvement needed!

I was using the gastritis page for study (in Medicine), but unfortunately I seriously think this page requires much more detailed information. At the moment, it just doesn't seem to be very useful for a medical student level. Many parts are written very ambiguously, and the "Causes" do not explain each type properly. If I ever find enough free time to rewrite this article, I would, but before then please help improve! Harrison's is always a good reference book to start with.

Shower link

Ref 13 links to the MSNBC site presumably espousing that a shower can mask the pain but the article doesn't seem to be there 10 months later, so is there a way to find where it's moved? Tyciol (talk) 17:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

gastritis

hello this is rake i would like to ask if with gastritis is possible to have childrens and Can i eat young food? Is not dangerous for my stomach? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.237.78.214 (talk) 19:01, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Intro sentence needs some work.

The sentence which introduces this article reads "Gastritis is an inflammation of the lining of the stomach, sike. It doesnt and has many possible causes."

Reads fine up to the word "stomach". Don't understand how the word "sike" fits into the context of this subject, and following with the sentence "it doesn't (which needs an apostrophe BTW) and has many possible causes", comes across as unprofessional and in any case, given the use of the word "sike" in the previous sentence, doesn't make sense anyway.

Something appears to be missing here, i.e., a description as to the possible causes of Gastritis or something that would provide context for the statement "....and has many possible causes". Otherwise I would omit everything after the word "stomach", and then follow that with the sentence that discusses possible causes.

Ronb1224 (talk) 10:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)Ron

Coffee as an irritant.

This article states that coffee would be an irritant to people with gastritis but the article does not clarify what elements of coffee would cause the problem. Is it the caffeine that is problematic? Can caffeine be taken in another form (not as coffee)? Please could someone clarify this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.195.240.74 (talk) 10:45, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Refs

Our text said "In 2013 there was about 90 million new cases of disease."

The support is in this table http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4561509/table/T3/

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

References

how about adding a link to 'duodenitis' under the 'see also' section?

this seems like a logical addition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.32.192 (talk) 05:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Community

I deleted the new section Gastritis#Community because Wikipedia is not a directory of links to other places on the web that are, to varying degrees, somehow related to the topic of an article. Editor Walidou47 reverted me with the edit summary Why can't it be a directory ?

It is not the purpose of the encyclopedia to recommend or endorse, in Wikipedia's own voice, any external site. Because it exists, this, or any, 'community' section bestows credibility on a particular social media site which Wikipedia is not qualified to do.

The section should be deleted.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:26, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Agree it should be deleted. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi I undid your deletion becouse of the following points: First, I disagree with ur claim, Wikipedia is in part a directory of links to other places on the web which are related 100% to an article. Secondly I did not add a link, I added a useful information and wikipedia's articles principal goal is to give useful information to readers. My add is not about recommendation or endorsement. Finally, I disagree when you say that any "'community' section bestows credibility", this has nothing to do with credibility in my own process of tought but to the contrary useful information for readers only add to the credibility of an article. Walidou47 (talk) 19:31, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Replying to your points:

1. Sure, Wikipedia has a lot of links to a lot of external sources in reference lists that support text in en.wiki articles. A reference list is not a directory of links. Articles may have an external links section; see WP:EL for details about the use of that and, for this particular case, note item 10 at WP:ELNO.
2. You did add a link as a malformed reference template (it was this malformed {{cite web}} template that drew my attention to Gastritis#Community):

   {{cite web |url=https://www.reddit.com/r/Gastritis/|url-status=live}} → https://www.reddit.com/r/Gastritis/. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)

3. I suppose that some people might think that there is value to be gained from a subredit but it is highly doubtful that a subredit constitutes a reliable authoritative source for a complex medical topic. A mention in en.wiki where all relevant information is supposed to be sourced to reliable sources will suggest to readers that en.wiki judges the subredit to be as reliable and authoritative as a peer-reviewed academic journal. It is not.

The section should be deleted.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:58, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

secondary sources

above section header added to keep two disparate discussion apart.—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:58, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Plus you need to use secondary source, no primary sources. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi James, I'm really having a bad time understanding the difference between using primary sources and secondary sources. Please help thanksWalidou47 (talk) 20:38, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Revert your most recent edits User:Walidou47 and we can work to find the best secondary sources on this topic. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:45, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

secondary sources on asymptomatic gastritis

Hello dear wikipedians, I'm interested in asymptomatic gastritis secondary sources but I can't find any, only a lot of primary sources. Can you please help on that matter? thanksWalidou47 (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Is not really a medical condition in and of itself. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:22, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

How do we define a medical condition ? Walidou47 (talk) 00:26, 26 November 2019 (UTC) And even if asymptomatic gastritis is not a medical condition why should'nt we find a secondary source to add a more detailed reference to it ?Walidou47 (talk) 00:33, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

If you can find a secondary source... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:22, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

acute and active gastritis

Hi folks, so I'm reading in some papers and reviews that the two terms coincide and others negate that saying for exemple that: "The term acute gastritis is not specific for an etiology but is used to indicate gastritis with an acute clinical presentation, with symptoms that promptly resolve if the underlying condition is corrected. This term should not be confused with active gastritis, with the latter term indicating the presence of neutrophils." ref= Torbenson M. (2019) Common Types of Gastritis. In: Zhang L., Chandan V., Wu TT. (eds) Surgical Pathology of Non-neoplastic Gastrointestinal Diseases. Springer, Cham p122 I agree with making the two term distinct, and therefore changing the body text of acute gastritis and maybe adding something on active gastritis. Thanks Walidou47 (talk) 11:33, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Surgical_Pathology_of_Non_neoplastic_Gas/UgGfDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=&pg=PP122 Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:22, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

You must paraphrase not copy and paste from the source.... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:26, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Editing

User:Walidou47 the source does not say Helicobacter heilmannii sensu lato and yet you added it as such... The source specifically says it is uncommon. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:14, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Should we keep urinanalysis in diagnosis section ?

The source doesn't say why it is an adequate diagnosis ... thanksWalidou47 (talk) 22:23, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Agree to removing it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Same question for X-Rays and "stool test to check for blood" Walidou47 (talk) 02:10, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

The source discusses why stool tests are done.[41] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 21:38, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I didn't like doing that big revert, but there wasn't much of a choice. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 21:38, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Cause

A classification of the gastritis could be great. Depending on the severeness, there is two types of gastritis. Knowing that is kinda important for the diagnosis and the treatments.Nandie2705 (talk) 11:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)