Talk:Elemental diet

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 Elemental diet.

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

Alternative?

Can anyone do some more research on this and find out if it's alternative or not? Thanks, Erythromycin (talk) 19:42, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a recognised clinical therapy (I asked the dieticians) Nickopotamus (talk) 10:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vivonex?

"Vivonex" is not found anywhere on Wikipedia, save for this article. A clarification/definition is in order. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 06:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SIBO

An elemental diet is the most effective treatment for SIBO. It's easily absorbed in the small bowel and starves the overgrowth of bacteria as a result. Practitioners typically prescribe antibiotics as a first-line treatment because an elemental diet is highly restrictive, some taste quite bad, and they can be expensive.

My first edit adding information regarding efficacy in treating SIBO referred to a study authored by the world's leading IBS researcher, Dr. Mark Pimentel at Cedars Sinai. As a new Wikipedia editor, I'm coming up-to-speed on the guidelines. I understand now the policy and reasoning behind not citing primary source.

However, I added back the information this time citing a review article from Mayo Clinic as a secondary source and the information was reverted again: https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(16)30589-4/fulltext

@Alexbrn: it's not clear to me what the objection is. WP:MEDRS has been cited, but I've read through the guidelines and this source seems to meet them. It's an independent secondary review article from a highly reputable source. Apologies for my first attempt missing the mark. I hope that my early misinformed attempts do not prevent any discussion of SIBO on this page in the future. 108.211.109.39 (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake - from the ref this looked like something just on the Mayo site (and Mayo Clinic is not generally a reliable source) - but looking closer I see it has been reputably published:

Krajicek EJ, Hansel SL (2016). "Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth: A Primary Care Review". Mayo Clin Proc (Review). 91 (12): 1828–1833. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.07.025. PMID 27916156.

I see there is also:

Rezaie A, Pimentel M, Rao SS (2016). "How to Test and Treat Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth: an Evidence-Based Approach". Curr Gastroenterol Rep (Review). 18 (2): 8. doi:10.1007/s11894-015-0482-9. PMID 26780631.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

I think something from these is due. Alexbrn (talk) 06:14, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Alexbrn: for taking another look! 108.211.109.39 (talk) 06:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]