英伦广角 维基百科冒险作为医疗信息来源（在线收听）

Researchers who compared peer-reviewed articles to the Wikipedia pages for the 10 most costly medical conditions in the U.S. discovered incorrect information on nine out of 10 pages. Dina Fine Maron reports

研究人员对比期刊论文和维基百科页面的美国最昂贵的十大医学疾病，发现维基百科页面10页中9页有错误信息。Dina Fine Maron为您报道。

Feeling a bit sick? Maybe you checked your symptoms on Wikipedia before seeing a doctor. And maybe your doctor checked Wikipedia before seeing you. Up to 70 percent of physicians and medical students admit to using Wikipedia as a reference, too.

感觉有点不舒服?也许你会在看医生之前，在维基百科上对比查看一下你的症状属于什么疾病。或许你的医生在见你之前也会查看一下维基百科。高达70%的医生和医科学生承认也会用维基百科作为参考。

But Wikipedia can be shockingly wrong. Researchers who compared peer-reviewed articles to the Wikipedia pages for the 10 most costly medical conditions in the U.S.—including heart disease, back pain and osteoarthritis—discovered incorrect information on nine out of 10 pages. Only information on concussions appeared to be accurate. The study is in the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association. [RT Hasty et al, Wikipedia vs peer-reviewed medical literature for information about the 10 most costly medical conditions]

但是维基百科可能会出现严重错误。研究人员对比期刊论文和维基百科页面的美国最昂贵的十大医学疾病，包括心脏病，背痛，和骨关节炎。居然发现维基百科页面10页中有9页的错误信息。只有有关脑震荡的信息好像是准确的。这项对比研究发表在《美国骨科学会志》上。

Earlier research suggested that Wikipedia is roughly comparable to peer-reviewed sources. A study in the journal Nature in 2005 found Wikipedia was about as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica, even about science topics. But that analysis looked only at 42 entries among the millions on Wikipedia. Since then the site has exploded, now including tens of millions of entries. The new results suggest we should all take online info with a grain of salt.—Dina Fine Maron

早期的研究表明维基百科上的资源大致相当于同行评议的资源。2005年《自然》杂志上的一项研究说明维基百科像大英百科全书一样准确，甚至可以和science topics相提并论。

但是，这项分析研究只是对于维基百科数百万中的42个条目，从那时以来，维基百科条目激增，现在维基百科已经有数千万个条目。最新的研究表明我们不应该完全相信网上的信息，应该对这些信息持怀疑态度。——Dina Fine Maron报道。