Talk:Stroma of cornea

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stroma of cornea article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Medicine Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-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 Stroma of cornea.

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

Often Ignored?

"This is often ignored by corneal transplant surgeons, leading to poor corneal mechanical strength in corneal transplant patients." I do not understand this remark. It seems very important so it might be a good idea to expand on this remark.Ruerd 12:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This unsourced, unsupported statement cannot be allowed as-is, yet seems sufficiently important to merit a second look. I cannot find any support for it so I am asking the community: Can anyone find support for this assertion? If not, I will remove the "often ignored by" part--or the entire statement--later today or tomorrow. Thanks! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 12:20, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced statement removed, as promised. If anyone can provide authoritative, verifiable information, please do so! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 13:06, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]