Talk:Morsicatio buccarum

Terminology: learning disability

I previously edited and wrote: "I removed "learning disabilities" from Epidemiology, since there is no citation. Note that "learning disability" is not the same thing as developmental delay, intellectual disability, or neurodevelopmental disorder, or the outdated 'mental retardation'". I was wrong about the author not including a citation; there is one and the term learning disability is used in the source material. However, after googling the author of this article and the source material, I now realize that the misunderstanding is due to a difference in how the term learning disability is used in different areas of the world. In this article and the original source material the term is used correctly for the UK, but in North America it is definitely not used this way. You may want to either change the terminology somehow to be more international, or indicate in the article that you are using UK terminology. In the context of this article, the term would be considered very offensive by some people, and at the very least it creates a gross misunderstanding by English speakers from various parts of the world. Cheers from a Disability Studies scholar.23.91.152.163 (talk) 16:09, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Where is the evidence that the term "learning disability" is used differently in UK compared to US? Matthew Ferguson (talk) 18:16, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Body-focused repetitive behavior

• This condition has different possible causes, should not define it in lead as a purely psychiatric condition
• Categories do not work like this. If body focused repetitive behavior falls within Habit and impulse disorders , then individual conditions which may be body focused repetitive behaviors are not categorized as habit and impulse disorders too. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 20:05, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Matthew Ferguson 57: Thank you for explaining this to me. Can you please revise the articles for the BFRB disorders? --David Hedlund ^SWE (Talk) 20:12, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Per request I have added psychiatric category, however it is questionable whether applying this category is appropriate since this is just one possible etiology of the topic.

Sorry I have no interest or knowledge to work on articles outside the scope of oral pathology in general. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 18:55, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

refspamming?

Hello, I was just accused for refspamming - I would like to explain my point and hope to convince the person who reverted my edit. The term morsicatio buccarum is ambiguous, which is acknowledged in the literature, as it can describe a clinical picture (injury of buccal muscosa), ***irrespective of etiology/cause***, as well as psychological condition, also known as lip-cheek biting, which is regarded a body focused repetitive behavior (subsumed in the DSM 5 section OCD-related disorders). Therefore, the term cavitadaxia has been recently proposed. I think that this is an important information. Happy to hear your thoughts --Wiki psych21 (talk) 14:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

A large fraction of your editing has revolved around the work of a small group of academics. What sort of connection to you have to these academics and/or their work? I am concerned that there is some conflict of interest here. In any case, Wikipedia generally does not cover neologisms, we would need some kind of indication that this new term has come into widespread use. - MrOllie (talk) 15:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. The term morsicatio buccarum is potentially stigmaziting for people with such injuries without psychological problems and this deserves mentioning in my opinion. No exaggeration: This is as if people who pull their hair (trichotillomania) versus those who just loose it because of genetic liability (i.e., alopecia) get the same label. Perhaps you find a better citation but the one I suggested is recent and fits well. Perhaps shortening the sentences or put it elsewhere/less prominent is a compromise. But again, perhaps you suggest another citation to address/resolve this terminological ambiguity --Wiki psych21 (talk) 16:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Wiki psych21, I asked you a question, are you planning to respond? MrOllie (talk) 17:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry. I work in the field of OCD spectrum disorders but I was not involved. Yet, every researcher has preferences for publications/specific authors/units - I do not consider this a conflict of interest. As I said, I am open to another citation; I just would like to make this point. Yours --Wiki psych21 (talk) 17:14, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello MrOllie, I would be happy if you could find the time to respond to my email and the proposed compromise, yours --Wiki psych21 (talk) 09:51, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't know who you emailed, but it wasn't me. - MrOllie (talk) 13:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, for the mistake, I meant the above message, not an email, yours --Wiki psych21 (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Again, I can't find any sourcing that indicates that anyone but Moritz uses the term, so it doesn't belong on this page. - MrOllie (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

OK, will suggest an edit later neither mentioning this other term nor any Moritz citation (my last edits in wikipedia cited other scientists), hope you like it, kind regards, --Wiki psych21 (talk) 08:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Behavioral procedures

Hello, I do not think it is fully justified to dismiss behavioral procedures. There is good evidence starting with the work by Azrin et al. that techniques such as awareness training in combination with habit reversal training show good effects: 10.1016/0005-7916(82)90035-0 - while this might not be first-line treatment it deserves to be cited, particularly as it is one of the controlled trials in the field. Happy for your feedback, cheers Firefly015 (talk) 17:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Relation with trichotillomania?

Is there a relation with trichotillomania? I think there is, and it would be relevant to mention that on this page. Does anyone know more? Laurier (talk) 14:30, 27 January 2022 (UTC)