Talk:Insulin-like growth factor 1

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Insulin-like growth factor 1 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

Archives: 1

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.

Molecular Biology: MCB / Cell Signaling

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is within the scope of the Cell Signaling task force, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive.

IGF-1 and CVD

@Bendegúz Ács: why do we mention the association in the lead as it's not causal per this paper (already cited)? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 19:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is summary of the contents of the article (see MOS:LEAD). The sentence in question is a summary of the Health effects section, which states that low levels are associated with an increased risk of CVD. This content is based on this reference [1], which is fully WP:MEDRS-compliant. Now the paper you linked is just a primary study, so it should not have the same weight as this systematic review and meta-analysis, i.e. a fully WP:MEDRS-compliant source. See WP:MEDASSESS for more information on the distinction and how to use studies representing different quality of evidence. The Mendelian randomisation study does not contradict any claim regarding the health effects of low IGF-1 levels:

Another shortcoming is that we could not investigate whether there is a U- or J-shaped relationship between IGF-1 levels and cardiometabolic diseases and insulin resistance, as suggested by a few observational studies

Bendegúz Ács (talk) 19:56, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 20:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:MEDRS we shouldn't be linking to a single Mendelian randomisation study. If there was a review or multiple Mendelian randomisation analyses we can cite them, but we shouldn't cite just one study. There needs to be consistent evidence, there is no point in citing one study. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:59, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So let's remove it? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 08:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]