Property talk:P1050
any state relevant to the health of an organism, including diseases and positive conditions
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1050#Value type Q12136, Q796194, Q2057971, Q808, Q1441305, Q175854, Q19656546, Q18596079, Q12131, Q7189713, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1050#Type Q215627, Q95074, Q729, Q30612, Q4915012, Q15304597, Q4271324, Q13002315, SPARQL
if [item A] has this property (medical condition (P1050)) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1050#Contemporary, SPARQL
Replacement property:
Replacement values: major depressive disorder (Q42844) (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1050#none of, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1050#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1050#Scope, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1050#Entity types
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Value HIV (Q15787) will be automatically replaced to value human immunodeficiency virus infectious disease (Q18556697). Testing: TODO list |
What property to use for smoking (Q662860) and other drugs?
editw:Sherlock_Holmes#Drug_use d1g (talk) 18:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
- non-controlled substance abuse (Q182413)
- alcoholism (Q15326)
- tobacco use disorder (Q152100)
- cocaine dependence (Q3743188)
Codeine for Gregory House (Q842945)?
Not necessarily a "problem"
editThe current description is "disease or other health problem affecting an individual human or other animal". A medical condition is not necessarily a problem. For example, pregnancy. At English Wikipedia there were discussions that "medical condition" should include positive medical conditions and not only negative ones and problems. See discussions at
- en:Template_talk:Infobox_medical_condition/Archive_2#Requested_move
- en:Template_talk:Infobox_medical_condition/Archive_2#This_infobox_is_incomprehensible
- en:Template_talk:Infobox_medical_condition/Archive_3#Perhaps_this_infobox_should_not_be_the_primary_medical_condition_infobox
I am changing the text to read "any state relevant to the health of an organism, including diseases and positive conditions". If anyone has better ideas then speak up. Please especially comment on the extent to which pregnancy is a medical condition. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:39, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Clinical Trial
editA clinical trial could have this property as a required medical condition for the trial. See https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q58407672 for example. Mahdimoqri (talk) 06:07, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Is it suitable for items such as epidemics ?
editlike in Encephalitis lethargica epidemic of 1915-1926 (Q110614024) Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 20:06, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Qualifiers
editI have just reviewed all the current usages of qualifiers for this property, selected a list of meaningful ones and used it as constraint.
For what concerns the dates (here's a list of all the date-like qualifers currently used), suppose that a person X discovered in date Y to suffer from a certain disease from another date Z and he/she announces his/her disease on date W. My understanding is that we should create the following qualifiers:
- Xtime of discovery or invention (P575)Y
- Xlatest start date (P8555)Z (or Xstart time (P580)Z, depending on the specific case)
- Xannouncement date (P6949)W
On the other hand, I don't see any meaningful usage of property inception (P571) (examples of corrections: [1][2]). Is it ok?
For what concerns the "applies to" relation (e.g. the part of the body affected by a certain issue), is it better to use
Use as a qualifier?
editI am working to replace of (P642), which is planned to be deprecated, and this property would be an ideal replacement in statements of the form:
[item][property, e.g. "has use"]medical diagnosis (Q177719)
But it is currently constrained to the main property scope. Before I extend the scope to qualifier and start mass migrating statements, does anyone have a problem with that? Thanks, Swpb (talk) 16:38, 19 September 2024 (UTC)