GONADOTROPHIN RESPONSES TO GnRH PULSES IN HYPOGONADOTROPHIC HYPOGONADISM: LH RESPONSIVENESS IS MAINTAINED IN THE PRESENCE OF LUTEAL PHASE CONCENTRATIONS OF OESTROGEN AND PROGESTERONE

LH pulse secretion changes during the menstrual cycle from a rapid regular pattern in the follicular phase to a slower and irregular pattern in the luteal phase. To determine whether the irregular LH pulse pattern in the luteal phase reflects altered GnRH secretion or altered pituitary responsiveness to GnRH, we gave low dose GnRH pulses (25 ng/kg i.v.) every 2 h or every hour for 10 or 12 d to three women with isolated GnRH deficiency. After 4 d of GnRH alone, oestradiol (E 2 ) was given and after 6 d progesterone (P) was added to mimic the hormonal milieu of the luteal phase. LH and FSH were measured every 4 h throughout and also every 20 min for 6 or 12 h, before and after GnRH alone (day 0 and day 4), after E 2 (day 6), and after E 2 + P (day 10 and day 12). Both GnRH pulse frequencies resulted in a rapid increase in plasma FSH to peaks on day 4 (every 2 h) and day 2 and 3 (every hour). FSH concentrations then declined as plasma E 2 rose to 50–80 pg/ml reflecting the selective inhibitory effect of E 2 on FSH release. Plasma LH was also increased after the hourly GnRH injections and this regimen was associated with a more rapid rise in E 2 reflecting follicular maturation. In contrast to the differences in mean hormone concentrations, administration of GnRH at both frequencies resulted in sustained one-on-one responsiveness of LH that was maintained in the presence of both oestrogen and progesterone at mid-luteal phase concentrations. We conclude that the slow frequency of LH pulses observed during the luteal phase reflects decreased GnRH pulse frequency rather than impaired pituitary responsiveness to GnRH.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74947/1/j.1365-2265.1987.tb00786.x.pd

Wikipedia as informal self-education for clinical decision-making in medical practice

Background For almost any topic, a Wikipedia page will appear among the first ten items of a search online. Wikipedia is also a site whose quality and reliability has been called into question. Methods In this paper, we aim to discuss medical practitioners’ use of Wikipedia, what this consists of and what it might be. We consider the context and history of Wikipedia before discussing the relationship between Wikipedia and the medical profession. In so doing, we will consider Wikipedia as a means of informal self-education and the extent to which it might inform clinical decision-making. We compare with the existing literature results from our two small-scale empirical studies of Wikipedia and clinical decision-making. Results Notwithstanding issues over quality and reliability, Wikipedia’s rules on verifiability are such that its articles are very heavily referenced, and this is just as true of health-related articles. The Cochrane/Wikipedia Initiative in improving the quality and reliability of medical and health pages in Wikipedia is significant in increasing reliability. Our respondents largely concurred with the results from earlier studies on the use of Wikipedia by medical practitioners. Conclusion Perhaps the very doubt over Wikipedia’s accuracy is its greatest strength as a means of informal education of doctors. That medical and health articles on Wikipedia can be so fully referenced and still be doubted is arguably a good thing and one whose effects may be spread into other, more trusted, publications. Hence, one might envisage a future where no one source is taken automatically on trust. Keywords Wikipedia, informal education, continued professional development, medical education