Talk:Gravidity and parity: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
→‎Fix: new section
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 4 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Biology}}, {{WikiProject Medicine}}, {{WikiProject Ecology}}, {{WikiProject Women's Health}}.
 
(31 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{WikiProjectSkip Biologyto talk}}
{{talk header}}
{{WikiProject Medicine |class=Start |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
{{WikiProject Biology |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Medicine |importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Ecology |importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Women's Health |importance=mid}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo=old(90d)
| archive=Talk:Gravidity and parity/Archive %(counter)d
| counter=1
| maxarchivesize=100K
| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadsleft=6
| minthreadstoarchive=1
}}
 
== Caesarean section ==
==Merge==
If a baby is delivered via Caesarean section, is the parity nomenclature exactly the same as for birth via vaginal delivery? The 2 different routes have implications for things like later stress urinary incontinence.
Due to the brief (ie, a simple textbook defination of these terms) nature of these articles, all of these should be combined into one Wikipedia article:
 
Parity
Gravidity
TPAL
Gravida/para
Gravida/para/abortus <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/216.186.224.74|216.186.224.74]] ([[User talk:216.186.224.74|talk]]) 14:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 
== Parity illustration ==
:I agree. [[Parity (biology)]], [[Glossary of terms associated with gravidity]] (formerly Gravidity), [[TPAL (medicine)]], [[Gravida/para/abortus]] should be merged into one article.
:1) I suggest merging into [[Parity (biology)]] since it seems to have the longest history of the lot.
:2) Suggest the resulting article should be moved to [[Obstetric history]], or something similar, which covers the range of terms involved without favoring any one more than another. It would also make the article title easier for the non-medical audience to identify the subject at a glance, while staying within the MEDMOS guidelines on article naming. (As an article subject 'Glossary of terms associated with gravidity' has two problems, it doesn't obviously cover parity (though that could be added), and I am not sure that a glossary is really an appropriate topic for an encyclopedia article.) [[User:Zodon|Zodon]] ([[User talk:Zodon|talk]]) 09:58, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
:3) I agree the aforementioned topics could be consolidated into [[Obstetric history]]. I would add that it is convenient for non-OB/GYN folks to find a brief reference on this nomenclature that is digested quickly. If that could be maintained within the superstructure of a larger article via links, I completely agree. --[[User:BloodGuru|Dr. B]] ([[User talk:BloodGuru|talk]]) 18:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
:4 I say leave it like it is. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/70.254.48.179|70.254.48.179]] ([[User talk:70.254.48.179|talk]]) 19:19, 1 April 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 
I don't know if it helps anyone else, but my experience in higher education studies of biology and science were helped tremendously by tying together like or similar processes as they repeat themselves in circles of a cycle. I felt my understanding didn't jump the gap until these overlooked signs were pointed out to me. I would like to see connection mentioned between obstetric number record of Mothers and the orbital notation record of Atoms, as they are the same cycles, just not commonly recognized due to each cycle being the same but of seemingly different circles. It was important to my understanding of recognizing Truth of a larger picture. - [[User:Dirtclustit|Dirtclustit]] ([[User talk:Dirtclustit|talk]]) 08:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree with the merge; will merge [[Glossary of terms associated with gravidity]] , [[TPAL (medicine)]] and [[Gravida/para/abortus]] here.[[User:Skydeepblue|Skydeepblue]] ([[User talk:Skydeepblue|talk]]) 21:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 
== Non-binary terms ==
== Nulliparity - Why change to breast CA risk ==
 
I edited this post to be inclusive of all sexes who may be birthing. I'm rather shocked that it was changed back when it is not in dispute that trans and intersex persons give birth and are not "female." This is a question of accuracy of terms, not of morality. As someone who works in birth, I would want the most accurate information available to people reading this page. [[User:CCalvano|CCalvano]] ([[User talk:CCalvano|talk]]) 04:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Unclear why [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parity_(biology)&diff=488495419&oldid=472966937 this edit] removed material sourced to Robbins Basic Pathology. text, and replaced with similar material based on a meta analysis. Would have thought that Robbins was a better source, but not my area of expertise. [[User:Zodon|Zodon]] ([[User talk:Zodon|talk]]) 07:32, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 
:{{ping|CCalvano}}
What does ''Robbins Pathologic Basis of Disease'' cite as the evidence? You don't seriously expect a simple reference to a "basic" preclinical text (typically aimed at non-medical students/non-physicians) to serve when there's citation of the primary reference available, do you? Who do you really think deserves credit for discoveries in medicine--the people who make and have to defend the discovery or some 2nd tier summary? You would probably object to citing the ''Reader's Digest'' as an authority...right? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.73.1.89|75.73.1.89]] ([[User talk:75.73.1.89|talk]]) 00:19, 4 June 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Correction:
::A female is an individual<br>who has female gonads, including:
::*A [[uterus]],
::*[[Fallopian tube]]s,
::*A [[vagina]], and
::*A [[cervix]].
:By that definition, pre-operative trans men (before [[sex reassignment surgery]]) and post-operative trans women (after sex reassignment surgery) are females if they have the above sex organs. Hence, they deserve to be included in all articles relating to females.
 
:However, you are right about intersex people, though. Intersex people are not females. In fact, intersex people are not entirely male or entirely female;<ref>{{Cite web |title=Intersex people {{!}} OHCHR |url=https://www.ohchr.org/en/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/intersex-people}}</ref> every intersex person's sex falls on a random point on the spectrum of sex.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Viloria |first=Hida |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Qoq5DwAAQBAJ&newbks=0&hl=en |title=The Spectrum of Sex: The Science of Male, Female, and Intersex |last2=Nieto |first2=Maria |date=2020-02-21 |publisher=Jessica Kingsley Publishers |isbn=978-1-78775-266-5 |language=en}}</ref>
== Nulliparity ==
&mdash; [[User:CrafterNova|<span style="color:#00FF00;font-variant:small-caps">'''CrafterNova'''</span>]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:CrafterNova|<span style="color:#3366CC">'''[ TALK ]'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/CrafterNova|'''[ CONT ]''']]</sup> 10:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
{{talk-reflist}}
 
"We encourage you to be bold in a fair and accurate manner."
The big question about that section is why is it even here. First, it is so far human only (whereas this article is about biology in general). Second it seems likely that it may duplicate other articles (e.g. [[childlessness]]). If it is to become a section, then it really needs balance. Silly to talk about small risks like breast cancer without talking about large risks, like maternal mortality. [[User:Zodon|Zodon]] ([[User talk:Zodon|talk]]) 07:38, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Getting_started?markasread=96949365
 
I was BOLD, fair, and accurate in my changes.
 
===humans only what???===
''...humans only...'' [insert next clause of sentence at this point].
 
"Commitment to openness and diversity
Though US-based, the organization is international in its nature. Our board of trustees, staff members, and volunteers are involved without discrimination based on their religion, political beliefs, sexual preferences, nationalities, etc... Not only do we accept diversity, but we actually look forward to it."" https://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values
 
If Wikipedia is committed to openness and diversity; if it "not only accept[s] diversity, but...actually look forward to it" then you must allow for the edits that include all those who birth, may be pregnant, and may be part of their family. [[User:CCalvano|CCalvano]] ([[User talk:CCalvano|talk]]) 04:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
As far as I know, it is quite possible for other animals to be nulliparous as well. None of my (neutered) female dogs never were pregnant, so it is quite possible for non-humans to also have never had a baby or other outcome of pregnancy to report.
 
::Saw this edit today: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gravidity_and_parity&diff=prev&oldid=949548103&diffmode=source
===childless ≠ nulliparous===
::Perhaps there should be a RfC on this? Might be due for an update. [[User:Myoglobin|Myoglobin]] ([[User talk:Myoglobin|talk]]) 23:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Childlessness is quite distinct from nulliparous. Childlessness means you don't have a child. Men can be childless. It is nonsensical to talk about "nulliparous men". There are a lot of reasons for being childless: e.g. you gave the baby you just had (i.e. you are very much not nulliparous) away for adoption. So it is here because it fits in the context of a discussion of pregnancy outcomes.
:::There'd be no point. For one, this was already unanimously shot down at the Village Pump. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_161#Gender-neutral_language_in_human_sex-specific_articles] Also, when one actually looks at the medical sources, both in the article and at PubMed, [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Gravidity][https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Parity] you can see that they basically all say "women" instead of "persons", including very recent sources. We of course follow the sources - [[WP:NOR]]. The IP needs to stop [[WP:EW|edit warring]] and read the previous links as well as [[WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS]] and [[WP:ADVOCACY]]. <span style="font-family:Palatino">[[User:Crossroads|'''Crossroads''']]</span> <sup>[[User talk:Crossroads|-talk-]]</sup> 02:25, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
On the other hand, I don't know of any laws which prohibit birth because you are nulliparous. So a woman could have multiple children and still be nulliparous. Heck, even a guy can have children.
:{{ping|CCalvano}} I totally agree with you. The overall situation has improved over the last 7 years.
:We need to stay strong and do teamwork to do the right things at the right time, to uphold genuine causes, and to make reasonable resolutions. &mdash; [[User:CrafterNova|<span style="color:#00FF00;font-variant:small-caps">'''CrafterNova'''</span>]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:CrafterNova|<span style="color:#3366CC">'''[ TALK ]'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/CrafterNova|'''[ CONT ]''']]</sup> 08:56, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
 
== Reason behind terms ==
The '''only''' relationship is that nulliparity is one of the causes of childlessness, and many, if not most, nulliparous women don't have children.
 
== Merge is completed; article should probably be renamed "Obstetric history" ==
 
I merged [[Glossary of terms associated with gravidity]] , [[TPAL (medicine)]] and [[Gravida/para/abortus]] here, as suggested above. This article should probably be renamed [[Obstetric history]] as it was proposed above. The article is still a '''total mess''', and needs a lot of work.[[User:Skydeepblue|Skydeepblue]] ([[User talk:Skydeepblue|talk]]) 21:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 
 
== Caesarean section ==
If a baby is delivered via Caesarean section, is the parity nomenclature exactly the same as for birth via vaginal delivery? The 2 different routes have implications for things like later stress urinary incontinence.
 
This article does a bad job of explaining '''''why''''' these terms exist and are used.
 
For example, casual googlin reveals that:
==Requested move 11 May 2014==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of a [[WP:requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section. ''
 
{{bquote|The term “grand multipara” was introduced in 1934 by Solomon, who called grand multiparas the “the dangerous multiparas” [1]. In general, the older literature defines “grand multiparity” (GM) as parity >7 [2,3]. More recent reports select a definition of GM to start from a parity of 5 because the threshold of risks of any obstetric complication, neonatal morbidity, and perinatal death increase markedly at parity ≥5 [4,5].}}
The result of the move request was: '''move to [[Gravidity and parity]]'''. [[User:Armbrust|Armbrust]] <sup>[[User talk:Armbrust|<font color="#E3A857">The</font> <font color="#008000">Homunculus</font>]]</sup> 11:36, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878019/
 
It feels very relevant to not just explain, for example, that "primagravida" means "a woman who is pregnant for the first time or has been pregnant one time" but why this distinction even exist. Why invent a specific term and not just go para 0, para 1, para 2, para 3 and so on. (Presumably because there are certain risks and conditions that are more common among women that has never given birth before).
----
 
[[User:CapnZapp|CapnZapp]] ([[User talk:CapnZapp|talk]]) 13:53, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 
==Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022==
[[:Parity (biology)]] → {{no redirect|Gravidity and parity}} – This article is about both gravidity and parity, and it makes sense to rename it so this is clear. A rename would clearly define the scope of this article and its contents. It is also appropriate as these two terms are closely related, and, as is clear above and in the content of the article (more than half about gravidity), this content has already been merged here. There is precedent for 'and' in titles for related concepts, including [[Sensitivity and specificity]]. [[User:LT910001|LT910001]] ([[User talk:LT910001|talk]]) 07:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/UCSF_School_of_Medicine/UCSF_SOM_Inquiry_In_Action--_Wikipedia_Editing_2022_(Fall) | assignments = [[User:SleepyJanus|SleepyJanus]] | reviewers = [[User:Rafaelverduzco|Rafaelverduzco]], [[User:Ddsov|Ddsov]] | start_date = 2022-08-08 | end_date = 2022-09-20 }}
 
<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:Rafaelverduzco|Rafaelverduzco]] ([[User talk:Rafaelverduzco|talk]]) 18:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)</span>
===Survey===
:''Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with'' <code><nowiki>*'''Support'''</nowiki></code> ''or'' <code><nowiki>*'''Oppose'''</nowiki></code>'', then sign your comment with'' <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>''. Since [[Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion|polling is not a substitute for discussion]], please explain your reasons, taking into account [[Wikipedia:Article titles|Wikipedia's policy on article titles]].''
 
:We chose to bold important terms and add the heading of parity in biology as separate from parity in human medicine.
* '''Oppose''' the move as proposed, as "gravidy" is not a word in common use (not in major dictionaries, no hits in this context on, say, Questia) and thus fails [[WP:RECOGNIZABLE]]. I'd have no similar objection to a move to a title such as [[Gravidity and parity]]. [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 09:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
:We also added more clinically pertinent information as to why this information is collected in pregnant patients and the clinical implications of gravidity and parity.
::Thank you. Yet another example of my poor spelling, for which I apologise. I've corrected the proposal. Ping to {{u|Justlettersandnumbers}} and {{u|BDD}}. --[[User:LT910001|LT910001]] ([[User talk:LT910001|talk]]) 11:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
:We included a statement as to the controversy of gender inclusive language in the field of obstetrics and gynecology, as well as a factually correct statement of the types of persons who are capable of carrying a pregnancy.
:::Well, that spelling does seem to be in use, just not in common use; so no apology needed, I think. No objection to the move as now proposed. [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 11:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
:We included more clinically pertinent information on nulliparity.
:We fixed up the “bare URLs” and added more meta-analysis and systematic review citations in the references. [[User:SleepyJanus|SleepyJanus]] ([[User talk:SleepyJanus|talk]]) 18:32, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
:Peer feedback:
:Nice addition of the section at the end that introduces the controversy around the term "women" in medical (and particularly obstetrics). The title for this section might more appropriately be "controversy and gendered language."
:Good job highlighting the significance of these terms to medicine, and distinguishing the use of parity and gravidity in medicine and biology. This added clarity. [[User:Annalpark|Annalpark]] ([[User talk:Annalpark|talk]]) 18:35, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
:The layout of the wiki page has been greatly improved thanks to the bolded words and subheadings making it easy to identify key terms. Nice discussion and inclusion of a meta-analysis on nulliparity. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Rafaelverduzco|Rafaelverduzco]] ([[User talk:Rafaelverduzco#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rafaelverduzco|contribs]]) 18:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 
== "Female" is a more accurate term than "woman" because sex and gender are very different ==
*'''Support''' Gravidity is a medical term, better article scope. <sup><small><font color="green">[[Special:Contributions/Victor_falk|''walk'']]</font></small></sup> <font color="green">[[user:victor falk|''victor falk'']]</font><sup><small> <font color="green">[[user_talk:victor falk|''talk'']]</font></small></sup> 01:50, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 
Since sex and gender are very different things,<ref>{{Cite web |title=The difference between gender, sex and sexuality |url=https://au.reachout.com/articles/the-difference-between-gender-sex-and-sexuality |access-date=2023-09-28 |website=au.reachout.com}}</ref> the terms "female" and "woman" are also very different.
===Discussion===
:''Any additional comments:''
*I'm not knowledgeable about the subject, but there's currently no instance of "gravidy" in any article on the English Wikipedia, so I'm inclined to think "gravidity" (which is used) is the appropriate form. --[[User:BDD|BDD]] ([[User talk:BDD|talk]]) 19:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
<hr />
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[WP:RM|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a [[WP:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section.</div><!-- Template:RM bottom -->
 
Reliable sources prove that pre-operative trans men, non-binary people and intersex people can also get pregnant and give birth, if they have female gonads including at least the following gonads and genitalia:<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Riggs |first=Damien W. |last2=Pearce |first2=Ruth |last3=Pfeffer |first3=Carla A. |last4=Hines |first4=Sally |last5=White |first5=Francis Ray |last6=Ruspini |first6=Elisabetta |date=2020-08-24 |title=Men, trans/masculine, and non-binary people’s experiences of pregnancy loss: an international qualitative study |url=https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-03166-6 |journal=BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth |volume=20 |issue=1 |pages=482 |doi=10.1186/s12884-020-03166-6 |issn=1471-2393 |pmc=PMC7444198 |pmid=32831015}}</ref>
== Fix ==
*a uterus
*fallopian tubes
*a vagina
*a cervix.
 
However, intersex people are not females, since they cannot be assigned a definitive sex at birth, meaning that their sex is ambiguous.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Ambiguous Genitalia: Definition & Causes |url=https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22470-atypical-genitalia-formerly-known-as-ambiguous-genitalia |access-date=2023-09-28 |website=Cleveland Clinic |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Philadelphia |first=The Children's Hospital of |date=2014-04-24 |title=Ambiguous Genitalia |url=https://www.chop.edu/conditions-diseases/ambiguous-genitalia |access-date=2023-09-28 |website=www.chop.edu |language=en}}</ref> Intersex people are not enitrely male or entirely female;<ref>{{Cite web |title=Intersex people {{!}} OHCHR |url=https://www.ohchr.org/en/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/intersex-people}}</ref> every intersex person's sex falls on a random point on the spectrum of sex.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Viloria |first=Hida |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Qoq5DwAAQBAJ&newbks=0&hl=en |title=The Spectrum of Sex: The Science of Male, Female, and Intersex |last2=Nieto |first2=Maria |date=2020-02-21 |publisher=Jessica Kingsley Publishers |isbn=978-1-78775-266-5 |language=en}}</ref> &mdash; [[User:CrafterNova|<span style="color:#00FF00;font-variant:small-caps">'''CrafterNova'''</span>]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:CrafterNova|<span style="color:#3366CC">'''[ TALK ]'''</span>]]&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/CrafterNova|'''[ CONT ]''']]</sup> 16:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
I've tried to copyedit, wikify and rearrange in a more logical order this article. I welcome the contributions and improvements of other editors. --[[User:LT910001|LT910001]] ([[User talk:LT910001|talk]]) 03:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
{{talk-reflist}}