Current use of medical eponyms – a need for global uniformity in scientific publications

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although eponyms are widely used in medicine, they arbitrarily alternate between the possessive and nonpossessive forms. As very little is known regarding extent and distribution of this variation, the present study was planned to assess current use of eponymous term taking "Down syndrome" and "Down's syndrome" as an example.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study was carried out in two phases – first phase in 1998 and second phase in 2008. In the first phase, we manually searched the terms "Down syndrome" and "Down's syndrome" in the indexes of 70 medical books, and 46 medical journals. In second phase, we performed PubMed search with both the terms, followed by text-word search for the same.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In the first phase, there was an overall tilt towards possessive form – 62(53.4%) "Down's syndrome" versus 54(46.6%) "Down syndrome." However, the American publications preferred the nonpossesive form when compared with their European counterpart (40/50 versus 14/66; P < 0.001). In the second phase, PubMed search showed, compared to "Down syndrome," term "Down's syndrome" yielded approximately 5% more articles. The text-word search of both forms between January 1970 and June 2008 showed a gradual shift from "Down's syndrome" to "Down syndrome," and over the last 20 years, the frequency of the former was approximately halved (33.7% versus 16.5%; P < 0.001). The abstracts having possessive form were mostly published from the European countries, while most American publications used nonpossesive form consistently.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Inconsistency in the use of medical eponyms remains a major problem in literature search. Because of linguistic simplicity and technical advantages, the nonpossessive form should be used uniformly worldwide.</p

Unintentional weight loss: diagnosis and prognosis. The first prospective follow-up study from a secondary referral centre

Objectives. To establish the incidence and causes of unintentional weight loss and to compare prognoses. Design. Prospective. Setting. Secondary referral centre. Subjects. 158 patients (89 female, 56%; 69 male, 44%) referred by general physicians for unexplained weight loss or for other reasons. In the latter case, weight loss was established after admission to hospital. Follow-up lasted for up to 3 years. Main outcome measure. Determining the course of weight loss in patients with diagnosed and undiagnosed causes. Results. The cause of weight loss was established in 132 (84%) patients and remained unclear in 26 (16%). Reasons were non-malignant (60% of patients) and malignant (24%) diseases. Psychological disorders represented 11% of the non-malignant group. A gastrointestinal disease caused weight loss in 50 (30%) patients. Of malignant disorders, 53% (20 of 38 patients) were gastrointestinal. Amongst the non-malignant group, 39% (30 of 77 patients) had somatic disorders. The prognosis for unknown causes of weight loss was the same as for non-malignant causes. Conclusion. Contrary to common belief, weight loss is not usually due to a malignant disease. A gastrointestinal tract disorder accounts for weight loss in every third patient. If minimal diagnostic procedures cannot establish a diagnosis, then endoscopic investigation of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract and function tests should be performed to exclude malabsorption