Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 5 October 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b4065
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b4065
| The first 100% of the full text of this article appears below. |
As David Rothman, who blogs about medical informatics, says, "It is as ridiculous to say wikis are good or wikis are bad as it would be to say that books are good or books are bad."1 2
He lists 69 medical wikis on his site.3 They vary in terms of who can make particular changes—just as Wikipedia locks certain entries that can be e-vandalised, and entries are reviewed by the administrators. They range from "Ask Dr Wiki," where licensed clinical professionals can contribute, to "WiserWiki," which is provided as a free service by the publishers Elsevier. Many medical students also use Wikipedia because it is easy to understand and they think that it is reasonably reliable and accessible.4
Wikis are the libraries of the future, mainly because they are contemporaneous.4
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b406
Imraan Jhetam, independent section 12(2) doctor1
1 Exeter EX4 4UY
imraanjhetam@doctors.org.uk
Read all Rapid Responses