Talk:Blood smear

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Blood smear.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

CLL link

Just to point out that the link for 'CLL' in reference to a type of leukaemia takes you to a page for 'central lancashire league'!!! it is, I think meant to stand for 'chronic lymphocytic leukaemia' rather than anything to do with english cricket.

Fixed that but what should CML point to? Rmhermen 21:19, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)

Chronic myeloid or chronic myelocytic leukemia. I think both are used, i think the former sounds better. T 05:42, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Changed Sentence

Confusing sentence: "When these are very abundant it can be a feature of infection or leukemia, although the most common types of leukemia (CML and CLL) are characterised by mature cells, although these cells have an abnormal appearance on light microscopy (which can aid in the diagnosis)."

I changed it to "When these are very abundant it can be a feature of infection or leukemia, although the most common types of leukemia (CML and CLL) are characterised by mature cells, and have more of an abnormal appearance on light microscopy (it should be noted that additional tests can aid the diagnosis)."

Hopefully, my edits make more sense, but if they're incorrect (as I made some assumptions without a lot of research ^^;), please change them! -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.31.220 (talk • contribs)

Is it just me, or does the paragraph about diagnosis of malaria sound a bit like it's been lifted from a textbook (i.e. plagiarized)? "chapters" regarding specific species... hmmmmm... -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamack42 (talk • contribs)

^{^{Superscript text}^{^{Superscript text}}}

Yes, definitely plagiarized. I've added a section to the talk page on it. The original source is not clear, though, as it's widely plagiarized. Knatily (talk) 18:34, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration

The CDC image shown is a special type of blood film used only for diagnosis of blood parasites, usually malarial infection. A conventional blood film looks very different. If someone has a non-copyright image of a typical blood film this could be set in place of the present one. Failing this, I would suggest it be clearly captioned. Bloodcancerguy (talk) 16:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I second this, that image is very misleading. I have been trying to take photos to replace it, but the only camera I can get into the lab is on my phone and the quality's too poor.--KX36 (talk) 18:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That photo wasn't great, so I've taken it off.--KX36 (talk) 11:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made a couple of smears and added the photos to the article. They are the more conventional push-type blood films you were looking for. Coinmac (talk) 10:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

fyi: the labels are wrong on that photo. the darker looking smear is technically a thin smear (only the thin feather edge is used) and the puddle looking thing is the thick smear. i disagree with most of the above comments if they are referring to the current main photo. 156.111.194.172 (talk) 22:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)(anthony anagnostou, med student, plenty of time with blood smears)[reply]

PBS micrograph needed

The article should have an image of a normal peripheral blood smear (under microscope). --202.28.181.200 (talk) 08:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

At least a large chunk of the "Malaria" section is copied word-for-word from another source. The odd wording of "Please refer to the chapters on each parasite for their microscopic appearances" indicates that this may have come originally from a book. However, this section is widely plagiarized on other sources, as well, so a Google search of that exact phrase comes up with a multitude of sources and no clear indication of which one is the original source.

At a minimum, this needs to cite the original source of this text, but it probably be rewritten instead. Knatily (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Open Source Hardware for Preparing These

At a recent OSHW conference, a FDM 3D Printed device/jig that a (mostly) untrained person could use to prepare these slides was mentioned
Between being neat, and potentially spreading awareness and thus the device's impact, i feel this would be a good addition to this page, thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric Lotze (talk • contribs) 04:47, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]