Template talk:ICD9

Interwiki

Please, add sl:Predloga:ICD9. Thanks. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 15:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Arcadian 16:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Please add fi:Malline:ICD9, too. Thanks! -Yupik 07:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

 Done --Selket ^Talk 07:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}The company Alkaline Software, Inc. which runs icd9data.com as a commercial service, has repeatedly inserted template tags to direct users to its own site for information about DSM codes (which are NOT the same as ICD-9 codes). Finally the company appears to have given up spamming the main DSM code pages, instead preferring to spam every single Wikipedia page about individual DSM diagnoses with its ICD9 template. What's worse, the ICD9 template is now protected indefinitely, so the spam can no longer even be removed by ordinary users. Recommendations: 1) Remove any and all protected templates which have been spammed into Wikipedia by Alkaline Software, Inc. 2) Remind interested users that the ICD-9 and the DSM-IV TR are NOT the same resource, and while there is significant overlap, underlying descriptions and diagnostic categories are NOT the same. There is NO reason for DSM diagnostic categories to be linked to ICD-9 descriptions. 3) Where ICD-9 data are desired, refer to the authoritative World Health Organization resource (just as the ICD-10 template does for ICD-10 data), NOT to a third-party commercial website run by spammers such as Alkaline Software, Inc. 81.179.102.222 09:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Thank you.

While removing the commercial templates may be a good idea (I don't know about it), you should move your proposal to Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) rather than making it here. CMummert · talk 15:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}} I apologize for not making the suggestion clearer: I am NOT making a general proposal to remove commercial spam. Rather, I am SPECIFICALLY highlighting the fact that passing off ICD-9 data as DSM-IV TR codes is factually incorrect and grossly misleading to users. Despite repeated removals of its factually incorrect and grossly misleading information, the company continues to spam Wikipedia with links to its own site. If you would like an example of a factually correct way of doing this, please refer to the ICD-10 template, which draws data directly from the World Health Organization. Unless editors are aware that Alkaline Software Inc. is a medical authority of any type whatsoever, I would urge you to leave the provision of ICD-9 medical information to the organization which produces it (namely, the World Health Organization) rather than relying on a third-party commercial reflector run by non-medical professionals.

Please see CMummert's comment above. Such a change requires a consensus for change. At a minimum, such a change should be discussed first. - auburnpilot talk 16:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

More ICD-9ery

(copied from my talk page, to facilitate centralized discussion) --Arcadian (talk) 01:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Question that's been kicked around before, but I was told would be best asked here: Why does {{ICD9}} use a .com site when {{ICD10}} uses the WHO's site? Are their ICD9 pages impossible to systematically link to, or something similar? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

When I created the template, I used the ICD9 lookups on the mortality statistics site at http://wonder.cdc.gov/. When the search functionality on that site stopped working, I swapped it to chrisendres.com. In October 2006, an anon swapped it to www.icd9data.com. I agree that a noncommercial site would be preferable, all else held equal. If you can find an equivalent, linkable, source that's not hosted on a .com, I would support a swap. --Arcadian (talk) 01:15, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

tr iw addition

Please add tr:şablon:ICD9, thanks. --Manco Capaq (talk) 11:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Category

{{editprotected}} Due to category renaming, please replace Catetgory:Medical templates with Category:Medicine templates. Thank you. --Russ (talk) 11:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. --- RockMFR 14:58, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Cite Wikipedia instead of an ad-spam web site

Currently this template generates an external link to a web site that's nearly useless. For example, "{{ICD9|299.0}}" generates an external link "299.0" that mostly contains advertisements. This page contains no useful information that is not already present on Wikipedia. I suggest that "{{ICD9|299.0}}" be modified to generate the same thing that "[[List of ICD-9 codes 290-319: mental disorders #code 299.0|299.0]]" generates, namely "299.0". This would require adding anchors systematically to the ICD-9 code pages but that's a useful thing to have anyway. Eubulides (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense. That could also solve the problem of the web site breaking the urls with each new year's edition too. One would thing they'd have the existing link URL updated to use /2010/ in the filepath vice /2009/ before they broke access to the old path! Their site is generating 404s as is. LeadSongDog come howl 14:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)