No abstract

No abstract

Forty anatomy articles were sampled from English Wikipedia and assessed quantitatively and qualitatively. Quantitatively, each article’s edit history was analyzed by Wikipedia X‐tools, references and media were counted manually, and two readability indices were used to evaluate article readability. This analysis revealed that each article was updated 8.3 ± 6.8 times per month, and referenced with 33.5 ± 24.3 sources, such as journal articles and textbooks. Each article contained on average 14.0 ± 7.6 media items. The readability indices including: (1) Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level Readability Test and (2) Flesch Reading Ease Readability Formula demonstrated that the articles had low readability and were more appropriate for college students and above. Qualitatively, the sampled articles were evaluated by experts using a modified DISCERN survey. According to the modified DISCERN, 13 articles (32.5%), 24 articles (60%), 3 articles (7.5%), were rated as “good,” “moderate,” and “poor,” respectively. There were positive correlations between the DISCERN score and the number of edits (r = 0.537), number of editors (r = 0.560), and article length (r = 0.536). Strengths reported by the panel included completeness and coverage in 11 articles (27.5%), anatomical details in 10 articles (25%), and clinical details in 5 articles (12.5%). The panel also noted areas which could be improved, such as providing missing information in 28 articles (70%), inaccuracies in 10 articles (25%), and lack or poor use of images in 17 articles (42.5%). In conclusion, this study revealed that many Wikipedia anatomy articles were difficult to read. Each article’s quality was dependent on edit frequency and article length. Learners and students should be cautious when using Wikipedia articles for anatomy education due to these limitations.

The azygos lobe (AL) is an accessory lobe of the right lung with prevalence between 0.4 and 1.2%. The aim of the present review is to provide a better estimate of the frequency of the AL and to examine its relationships with other variables such as population, diagnostic methods, and co-occurring illnesses. Studies published between 1899 and October 2020 were searched through three electronic databases; Google Scholar, PubMed, and JSTOR. Titles, abstracts, and full texts of the retrieved entries were screened to determine their appropriateness for inclusion. A total of 88 studies relating to 1,033,083 subjects met the inclusion criteria. A random-effects meta-analysis yielded an overall prevalence of 0.30% (95% CI: 0.0024-0.0035, I 2 = 97.9%). Linear regression and subgroup analysis revealed a negative correlation (ρ = À0.540, p <0.001) between AL prevalence and sample size; studies with smaller sample sizes had higher prevalences. The AL prevalence in individuals with congenital pulmonary defects, 5.2% (95% CI: 0.0018-0.0086, I 2 = 0%), was 17 times higher than the overall prevalence (z = 6.65, p <0.001), suggesting associations with other abnormalities and possibly a genetic predisposition. In addition to an evidence-based synthesis of AL prevalence, this study demonstrates publication bias and small-study effects in the anatomy literature. Awareness of the AL is crucial for radiologists when they interpret unusual radiological findings and for surgeons when they operate in the region.

No abstract