Talk:Schizophrenia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Problems with the article[change source]

  • Currently the lead is too generic. The description may as well fit for obsessive-compulsive disorder
  • Ideally we want to at least mention the topics in the en article in some way, ie. extend the article.
  • Despite being simpler than en, we want to be correct

I do not have the necessary knolwedge, so help would be appreciated. Note: Sipmlifying a complex article we can do, however, come up with a simple article from the start we cannot. --Eptalon (talk) 13:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I have noticed some inconsistencies between the EN version and the ZH version of the article. The one at EN defines schizophrenia as "a psychiatric diagnosis that describes a mental disorder" (which suggests that it is some form of "classification") while the ZH version defines the term in a similar way as to how we define it ("a type of mental illness"). Chenzw  Talk  15:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Positive and negative symptoms?[change source]

The article mentions positive and negative symptoms in the section about drug treatment. I think these ought to be explained, but I'm afraid I only have a very vague understanding myself. --Mickel (talk) 13:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I tried to explain it as simple as I could from the knowledge I have myself. I'm not sure if that will do, though. /Averuuh 15:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Positive symptoms are called positive because it is something that isnt there when somebody is mentally well e.g. someone who is mentally well will not have hallucinations hence they are added
Negative symptoms are called negative because it is as if something has been taken away. For example someone who is normally always out with friends, staying in all the time and being withdrawn.
That explanation is even more confusing... /Averuuh 18:36, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
A positive symptom is something a person has because of their illness, which a normal person does not, such as hallucinations - normal people don't hallucinate under normal circumstances. A negative symptom is a deficit of something in a person because of their illness that is present in normal people, such as anhedonia - normal people are able to experience pleasure. Jim Michael (talk) 02:05, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Updated article as a simplified version of the main English[change source]

As per this project here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MED/Translation_project --Jmh649 (talk) 08:16, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

98 terms/words which need to be simplified[change source]

I did a quick search for low frequency (and therefore not simple) vocabulary in the article as updated by Content Rules as part of their project. These are the first 98 words or terms that need to be simplified. I'm pretty sure non of them are already linked, but apologies in advance if I missed one or two. In order, they should be:

  • removed (if possible)
  • removed and replaced with simpler words or phrases in English
  • linked to an article on Simple English wikipedia (and that article should not be complex)

Wiktionary should be used sparingly if at all. When these are done, there is even more vocabulary to be simplified and then sentence structure as well. Gotanda (talk) 02:23, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

acute  Done adolescence  Done aftermath  Done agitated  Done
agitation  Done ambivalence ameliorate  Done amphetamines  Done
atypical autism  Done bipolar  Done catatonic  Done
causal  Done causality  Done chronicle  Done cited  Done
classification cocaine  Done cognitive delirium  Done
delusional  Done dementia  Done diagnosis diagnostic
disapproval  Done discontent  Done disproved  Done dysfunction  Done
epidemiology  Done exacerbate  Done finland  Done frontal cortex
genetic  Done genetics  Done glutamate grandiose  Done
hallucinations  Done hemisphere  Done hereditary  Done hypothesis
immigration  Done impair  Done impaired  Done impairment  Done
impulse control  Done inconclusive  Done innate  Done inpatient  Done
insidious  Done interpersonal  Done intoxication  Done involuntary  Done
irrational  Done irritability  Done jealousy  Done malnutrition  Done
manic marijuana  Done mediating  Done metabolic syndrome
mimic  Done mute  Done neural  Done neurological  Done
neurons  Done neurotransmitter  Done onset outpatient  Done
pervasive  Done positron emission tomography  Done postmortem  Done postulated  Done
postures  Done prenatal  Done prevalence  Done prognosis  Done
proteins  Done psychiatric  Done psychological  Done psychosis  Done
receptors  Done relapse  Done relapses  Done resonance  Done
serotonin  Done simplistic  Done single-photon emission tomography  Done stigma  Done
stimuli  Done stupor  Done subjective  Done temporal lobes
threefold  Done transient  Done unintelligible  Done viral  Done
womb  Done worsen  Done

End of list. Gotanda (talk) 02:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Writing for a general audience[change source]

When we write for a general audience we use "person" not "patient" and we do not specify "doctor's" Thanks --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion to use "person" not patient. However, by rewording without the word "doctor", you have written those passages in the passive. Have you looked at the guidelines Wikipedia:How_to_write_Simple_English_pages? The simplest sentence structure is subject-verb-object. We need some term there. Thanks, Gotanda (talk) 01:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree that there are exceptions where a doctor is not the person acting, but in most cases, I believe doctors or their agents are performing these action. At the 10,000 foot level, is not "doctor" an appropriate word to use? Who is "we" in Jmh649's first sentence, would the Washington Post use the word "doctor" when writing about Schizophrenia? What is a good, short Anglo-Saxon word for "health-care-giver"? Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 03:57, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I've been trying to think about this today. Healthcare professional or mental health professional come to mind, but doctor is plain and simple. Is it common for the person diagnosing or treating schizophrenia to not be a doctor? I expect psychiatrists are usually filling that role, but does anyone else, really? Gotanda (talk) 09:43, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
In many countries yes people who treat schizophrenia are not psychiatrists. The "we" I refer to are those that are writing medical content in English. It is important to write in an encyclopedic tone. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
I agree we should write in an "encyclopedic tone." However, I believe that means speaking in an objective voice and attributing opinions to particular speakers or groups. Simple English Encyclopedic Tone (or writting style) means active voice, short Anglo-Saxon word, minimizing avoidable jargon, etc. I believe it does not mean "writing for children" but there are other people here who disagree and would say "write for a 12-year-old." Academic writing is terrible. (I have done some.) The technically accurate term may be "qualified medical professional", but for our readers "doctor" captures the same idea. Another problem is using "prescription drugs" instead of "drugs." Non-prescription drugs can affect a schizophrenic's behavior as a side effect, so is the word "prescription" necessary? Similarly, "drugs and medications" should be shortend to "drugs". The problem is the sophistication of the target audience. Eskimos have 12 different words for "snow". We just call all different forms of snow with one word. For the purpose of discussing the diagnosis of schizophrenics, "doctor" can capture what we meant. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Readability[change source]

There has been some simplifying of the introduction. A quick test gives these figures:

  • Flesch-Kincaid reading ease score is 44 (0 to 100, higher is best), Simple English aims for 70+
  • Flesch-Kincaid grade level is 10.7th grade, 8th grade is the average American reading level.

While these figures are only part of the process of simplifying, they do give an indication of what needs to be done.--Peterdownunder (talk) 00:52, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

How about now? --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Doc James, I replaced the "Complex" tag because there are still passages that are not simplified. Also, it needs a thorough copyedit to make sure that simplification hasn't introduced errors. I will keep at it, but have to go to work. Sentence structure should follow a basic subject verb object order when possible. Putting the subject at the front of the sentence improves readability greatly. More later, Gotanda (talk) 20:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


Prevention[change source]

What does this sentence mean? "Prevention is difficult because there are no reliable markers for the later development of the condition." Does this mean that you can not measure the success of prevention, because you do not know if the person was going to develop schizophrenia? --Peterdownunder (talk) 06:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

It means that there is no reliable test to determine who will get schizophrenia in the future.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Udate: issues found[change source]

I already commented above, and I list some of the issues found:

  • "Change in personality": While this is easy to understand, it may also be misleading: An alcoholic also changes in personality: If he does not get the alcohol he needs, he will be in a bad mood, when he drank, he will seek out fights/confrontations, and will be easy to anger. Yet alcoholism is probably not a mental disorder. In other words, care needs to be taken to explain the terms used. The change in personality of an alcoholic is probably quite different from the change in someone with Dissociative identity disorder, or somenoe with eg. Obsessive-compulsive disorder, or even someone with clinical depression, or other mood disorders....
  • The phases section probably needs some links explaining the terms. As someone who isn#t a medical doctor, I have no idea what "Pre-psychotic Prodrome" may actually stand for, other than being a label used to classify (as in: some of the balls are green, others are red...)
  • Can we get some kind of external links (eg. to self-help groups, if they exist?)
  • I didn't have a-detailed look, but I guess to be scientifically accurate, the longer sentences are needed

Other than that, I can only say: Good work. :) --Eptalon (talk) 10:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Cutting out phases?[change source]

The phases form is not very informative, it is full of scientific jargon and the link is broken so I take the liverty of removing it. Feel free to put it back for anybody with a good justification for all this jargon and with a good secondary source.Ex-nimh-researcher (talk) 13:14, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

neural networks?[change source]

I hva deleted the following section: An electrical impulse called an action potential travels down the axon of a neuron. At the end of the neuron the action potential causes the release of different chemicals called neurotransmitters, into the space - called the synapse - between that axon, and the axon or dendrite of the next neuron.

The neurotransmitters cross the synapse and set up the action potential in the next neuron. There are different types of neurotransmitters; dopamine, glutamate and serotonin, are three which are linked to the symptoms of schizophrenia. It could be there is too much of a neurotransmitter in one area of the brain or not enough in others. It is not yet known for sure.

The neurons in the brain are connected, and form pathways, which in turn form "neural networks", which is like the brains wiring. To complete a task -like recalling a memory - usually more than one region of the brain is involved, and the signals travel along the specific neural pathways in the neural network responsible for that type of task. People with schizophrenia have been shown to have problems that affect these neural networks.

There is no reference and doesn't really fit in. Feel free to put it back with a good ref and in a place where it fits.Ex-nimh-researcher (talk) 13:33, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree with this. We can - and do, to some extent - deal with basic neurology elsewhere. I am wondering whether we could shorten and simplify the treatment sections. This is not meant as a page to teach professionals; it is meant for general readers whose grasp of English is a bit limited. As such, the page is long, and too complex in its language. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:50, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
I have added two sentences in the Medication section, please review and amend as you see fit. Not being a doctor, I also do not have any reference I could add. I have also written a stub for the article "receptor antagonist" I linked to. --Eptalon (talk) 15:45, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Pre-onset symptoms[change source]

It has proven extremely difficult to predict onset of psychosis, so I am removing this section since it is also too complex. The references also don't really contain what is claimed either.


Around 40 percent of men and 23 percent of women who have schizophrenia had "pre-onset" signs of schizophrenia before they were 19 years old.[16] This "pre-onset" phase can occur as long as 30 months before symptoms begin.[17] During the pre-onset phase, people who go on to develop schizophrenia might have brief or self-limiting serious or violent symptoms,[18] as well as the non-specific symptoms of social withdrawal, annoyance, a general feeling of extreme unhappiness,[19] and clumsiness.[20]

Violent behavior A minority of people with schizophrenia have an increased risk for aggressive behavior. The risk for aggressive behavior increases with comorbid alcohol abuse, substance abuse, antisocial personality, or neurological impairment. Individuals with severe mental illness such as schizophrenia have a greater risk of being victims of violence.[21] Ex-nimh-researcher (talk) 16:28, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not a doctor, but I think it would be important to point out that the majority of Schizophrenics are not violent. People with the disease are stigmatized; and there are many movies which portray violent people who are in fact mentally ill.... --Eptalon (talk) 16:43, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Agree completely!Lap234 (talk) 20:27, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Side effect of antidepressants[change source]

Iam putting back the section about side effects of medication. The source is very extensive secondary literature as pr WP:MEDRS, ant this may be an enormous problem in society. I have treated a woman who had been in anti psychotic therapy for over 20 years, and the psychosis was clearly triggered by antidepressants. Please feel free to discuss if it can be written in a better way. Lap234 (talk) 09:03, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Use of linked terms[change source]

In general, our policy with linked terms is not to explain them in full on every page where they are used. That adds to the volume of the prose, and leads to inaccuracy.

If we have a page, such as "diagnosis" or "symptom", let it do its job, or revise it if it is incorrect. Do not try and spell it out in full. Also, from a practical point of view, to spell out fully what these terms mean adds greatly to the quantity of prose which readers have to deal with.

Above all, technical terms must be used accurately. They are there for a reason. It is not our policy to take accurate terms and turn them into everyday English. It is to simplify the prose whilst still keeping the content accurate. Let the links do their job!

But if the term is not explained well, then revise that page.

Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

@Macdonald-ross: Okay, thanks. Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 13:37, 15 December 2015 (UTC)