Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Shocker: Doctors say you shouldn’t rely on Wikipedia to diagnose your ailments

Is Wikipedia Reliable For Medical Information

It sounds like common sense but apparently some people need to be told that they shouldn’t rely on Wikipedia for accurate medical information. BBC News reports that new research published in the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association estimates that around 90% of all medical-related entries on Wikipedia contain factual errors, which is particularly disturbing because “up to 70% of physicians and medical students use the tool.”

It isn’t surprising that Wikipedia’s medical entries aren’t exactly up to the quality of peer-reviewed medical journals — it’s an open encyclopedia on the Internet that anyone can edit, which means it takes constant vigilance from medical experts to make sure that medical entries retain their accuracy. And because most medical experts are typically busy, you know, helping people recover from illnesses and injuries, they probably don’t have the time to monitor medical Wikipedia entries to guard them from vandalism or inaccurate information.

“While Wikipedia is a convenient tool for conducting research, from a public health standpoint patients should not use it as a primary resource because those articles do not go through the same peer-review process as medical journals,” said study author Dr. Robert Hasty, who recommended that anyone who had questions about a particular health problem they have should just break down and go to their physician instead of trying to play Internet doctor all by themselves.

Prior to joining BGR as News Editor, Brad Reed spent five years covering the wireless industry for Network World. His first smartphone was a BlackBerry but he has since become a loyal Android user.