Talk:Necrotizing enterocolitis

Prevention Section

"Necrotizing enterocolitis can best be prevented in infants by avoiding preterm birth and congential heart disease, however those two conditions have not been successfully prevented yet."

Remove? Adds nothing to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.198.9.33 (talk) 14:54, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Graphic pictures

A previous edit mentions the "highly disturbing picture which does not need to be on top". I agree that the image is highly disturbing - perhaps it should be made even less prominent somehow? Haukur (talk) 23:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree, it's way too much. SpecB (talk) 03:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I also agree; I don't know whether the pictures are less prominent than when these comments were posted, but they are very graphic, and still visible in the main page of the article. Many of the people visiting this page will probably be in a vulnerable state - family and friends of family of an infant with a diagnosis. Some of them will probably find the images (especially the abdominal autopsy) very disturbing indeed. Wikipedia doesn't provide an option for linking to these images (see and ).

I also doubt whether the pictures are adding that much value to the article. As a layperson, I didn't really gain anything from them at all. What is their value to the layperson supposed to be? If their value is more for someone with medical training, then isn't this something that's available elsewhere where the risk of upsetting people is lower?

I'm strongly considering deleting the image, as Wikipedia doesn't appear to provide any less drastic options. Is there a less potentially upsetting image that might illustrate the article just as well?Nickboyd.n (talk) 11:59, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree it's disturbing, but am surprised that there isn't a single mention of "Wikipedia doesn't censor" anywhere in this discussion..

Doesn't WP have a "click to view image" template? It looks like there used to be a "DisturbingImage" template, but it was deleted.. I'm guessing because someone doesn't know the difference between "I am being a God saying you cannot see certain stuff" and "You have been warned, if you really want to see it, click here..". These arguments drive me up the wall when I see them. There is a big difference between censorship and choice. Jimw338 (talk) 04:32, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

References

Resources

Resources can be drawn from the following journal reference:

• Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center. Evidence-based care guideline for necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) among very low birth weight infants. Cincinnati (OH): Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (2010 Oct 7). "Evidence-based care guideline for necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) among very low birth weight infants": 10. Retrieved 6 May 2013. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite journal requires |journal= (help); External link in |last= (help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)</ref>
• Panigrahi, P (2006). "Necrotizing enterocolitis: a practical guide to its prevention and management". Paediatric drugs. 8 (3): 151–65. PMID 16774295.

Requesting interested editors to help in adding proper contents.Diptanshu^Talk 04:45, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Underlying pathology?

I have removed the unsourced sentence "It is not known, however, whether some underlying pathology contributes to premature birth and low birth weight" from the diagnosis section. I think some reliable source is needed that this possibility is under serious consideration as a cause of NEC, as opposed to generic speculation. Recent evidence of a strong association of NEC with non-human milk feeding suggests otherwise.--agr (talk) 15:45, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Necrotizing enterocolitis. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402132016/http://rad.usuhs.edu/medpix/parent.php3?mode=case_viewer&pt_id=12951&imid=48824&imageid=48824&quiz=no to http://rad.usuhs.edu/medpix/parent.php3?mode=case_viewer&pt_id=12951&imid=48824&imageid=48824&quiz=no

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 02:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Probiotics

The sentence about prevention should consider deleting “probiotics”. See https://www.fda.gov/media/172606/download Fkarayan (talk) 19:01, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Maternal factors

The lead section says that maternal factors such as [blah blah blah] have not been consistently implicated with the development of NEC. Then the "Causes" section says "Several risk factors have been implicated" and lists basically the same things under "Maternal factors". So...have they been implicated but not consistently, or is the "not" in the lead wrong, or what? 69.53.59.221 (talk) 00:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)