Template talk:Infobox drug/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 → Archive 10

Drugbox, Chembox and handling of SMILES, InChI, and CID (PubMed ID)

Beside the merging aspect I want to stress that the handling of InChI, SMILES, and CID is different in the Drugbox and the Chembox. So is also the complexity of the parser functions. In both cases I would prefer to have the same solutions. Although structural link-outs have been already discussed earlier, there was never really a consens for this kind of services, which should be used. I am still in favor of a Special:Search (feature request) page like proposed by User:Beetstra. The feature request seems to be stalled, but please note that the Cheminformatics community has still an eye on it and we had behind the scenes several eMail discussions about it.

The three key databases are at the moment PubChem, eMolecules, and ChemSpider. Since the later two cover even PubChem I would rather prefer to link only to them, if we can have only a limited number of link-outs? Anyway, since the actual template is protected I would like to get access or some comments of people having access. I personally do not see a problem with the parser functions, but I might get into troubles if I would like to introduce them to the Chembox as well? Can anyone forward me to special page to find all articles, which use the boxes? I would like to know what the usage ratio is and about how many pages we are talking? And how serious is the parser function problem?

Furthermore got I informed by others that some sites are using the Template:InChI link, which links directly to ChemSpider, but those boxes look rather deprecated, e.g. like in the article Anthrone. Would it not be a good idea to unify such things? Since InChI and SMILES can make all boxes unreadable, many contain <br/> statements for reducing the width. I understand the formatting issue, but this has three consequences. First, Google is not indexing such things, if at all. Second, we need parser functions replacing the breaks, otherwise the created URI for searches are invalid. Third, the recently announced InChIKey might solve some of those problems, but it is still not clear if this key is really providing unique identifiers (see comment section of the linked blog article).

We are looking forward for some pro-active and pragmatic comments, which will allow us to make a step forward. JKW 22:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I just updated the InChI article for the InChIKey information, and noticed this discussion popping up in my search. I really think the InChIKey should solve many of our problems nicely. Our introduction of InChI on Wikipedia has stalled because of the length problem (see this older discussion). The worry about uniqueness for InChIKey looks unfounded - it is predicted that the probability is vanishingly small even among all the compounds known. At the blog you mentioned, the updated comments say, We have now checked for clashes. We do not see ANY clashes at all so that would seem to confirm it for the 17 million compounds at ChemSpider. It also looks feasible that ACD will allow PNGs to be produced in ChemSketch with an embedded InChIKey. I'll propose soon at WP:CHEMS that we support InChIKey. BTW, I got a rough count of articles using the Chembox and Drugbox by using the Whatlinkshere feature, 500 at a time. Walkerma 04:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't think we should implement this at this time. InChIKey is brand new, it's still in beta, and its use creates a new dependency upon an untested external server. --Arcadian 04:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, InChIKey is in beta for sure. There are requests for a couple of tweaks already. Just fyi the ChemSpider Images are now accessible via a web service and available as PNG with both InChI Strings and InChI Keys. See the blog posting tonight at Structure Images on ChemSpider Tagged for InChI Searching. Web Service Enabled. --24.162.249.146 03:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Molecular mass, molecular weight and molar mass

All of these templates need to be changed to consistently using these terminologies. In every case I have looked at molar mass should replace all of them, except regarding elements where standard atomic weight is correct. --Nick Y. 21:35, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Also the inclusion of units would be a step in quality improvement.--Nick Y. 21:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Issues handling non-organic compounds

I notice an issue when trying to correct the formula for Cisplatin. As you can see in the image, It is a "Pt" w/ 2 "Cl" & 2 "NH3. According to the Hill system since there is no Carbon, the elements should all be listed in alphabetical order, as "| Cl=2 | H=6 | N=2 | Pt=1" yielding Cl2H6N2Pt. This simply shows "?" for the formula. I thought maybe the order needed to be different, since traditionally non-organic componds with noble metals list the metal first, such as Pt2Cl2H6N2. However, this didn't work either & I proceeded to try all combinations of it to realize that whenever Carbon is removed, the formula shows "?". Is drugbox not capable of handling the absence of a Carbon, or is something else going on here? --Moschi 10:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Well spotted. Currently a series of nested tests are undertaken for this formula cell:
  1. chemical_formula (the original single parameter) is shown if defined
  2. Else if "C" is defined then there is a formula composed of individual element values.
  3. If "C" is not defined then there is assumed to be no formula at all defined and so the showing of a "?"
To sort this out, either we could:
  1. required "C" to be defined in elemental Hill formulas but set to zero if no carbon atoms are to be shown, eg |C=0 |H=2 |O=1 for H2O - very non-intuative and ugly !
  2. Alter the test for a formula to consider several elements, not just carbon. Not sure would need to expand to include all elements, just +hydrogen + nitrogen + oxygen should cover drugs. Clearly the "neat" approach.
 Code  {{#if:{{{C|}}} |
 To    {{#if:{{{C|}}}{{{H|}}}{{{O|}}}{{{N|}}} |
Can anyone foresee any problems with this ? :-)
As for notable metals first... would need a little time to think/work on that. Whilst easy enough to do (a separate conditional test for "C" at the start of the list of elements before a duplicated block of coding for the noble metals, and then where the noble metals currently are each defined add a test to exclude from showing), but template coding will look even more convoluted and I need to think if there might not be a neater way for this already complex infobox (eg create a template just to show formulas and shunt the coding there). David Ruben Talk 00:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
The complex use of dynamically called OrganicBox_atom vs OrganicBox depending if an element is defined and the conditional parameter values makes setting up conditionals on blocks of elements unweildy. I'll have a rethink on this over the next couple days... my current preference is that it might be better to have a new Hill_Atom template, that itself decides whether to show anything or not (vs use of alternative calling of OrganicBox vs OrganicBox_atom), and takes values not just of the element in question, but also of carbon and a place holder tag.
Hence {{Hill_atom | element | abbreviation | number | colour | carbon_number | place tag }}
e.g. {{Hill_atom | Hydrogen | H | {{{H|}}} | rgb(12,34,56) | {{{C|}}} | on }}
So decision to show is if number defined, and then if happens to be either noble metal or hydrogen and (carbon defined vs place tag) says to show or not. Hence noble metals can be shown at start if no carbon, else in alphabetical order, and likewise hydrogen can shift in its positioning David Ruben Talk 21:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Add EINECS number parameter

Some drugs, like Natamycin are in the EINECS database. It would be neat if you could look at how {{chembox new}} handles that and add it as a parameter. See for example Sodium formate to see an example of chembox new with an EINECS number. Thank you . — Ksero (leave me a message, things I've done) 00:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. That could be useful, although a step towards making the Drugbox more redundant to {{chembox new}}? :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Definitely not, as EINECS indicates this was only used 1 January 1971 to 18 September 1981, superceeded by ELINCS and then EC-Number, so at very least, link should be to EC-No. David Ruben Talk 02:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Pregnancy category in drugbox template

Links to pregnancy category are enabled in Template:drugbox, but relevant wikipedia cataloging has not been implemented. This makes it difficult for readers to search here for drugs by pregnancy category. Could someone here lend a hand in implementing some sort of category scheme? --Una Smith (talk) 00:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

That's a very good idea. I'd be happy to whip up a scheme, as long as David (or someone who speaks template :) agrees to modify the code so cats will be automatically added (i.e. as Category:Drug pages needing a structure drawing). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, how's the following scheme? I've contacted David about implementing automatic categorization.
—Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Easy enough to do, however what if there is no category specified - should there also be Category:Drugs in FDA pregnancy category unspecified and Category:Drugs in TGA pregnancy category unspecified. Begs questions though:
  1. Are all drugs available in US/Australia always given a category by that country ?
  2. What then do to with a drug not available in say US, when clearly "pregnancy_US = " will be left blank not though oversight but because not relevant to the US.
Finally why "Drugs in TGA...", what does TGA mean ? I do not see that mentioned in Pregnancy category article ? Might better naming be Category:Drugs in Australian pregnancy category A, except this is a very long category name ?
Let me know what you think over these points and I'll happily code up (will need similar code as current display switching to force capitalisation). As would be autogenerated categories, easy enough to later alter if we so wish :-) David Ruben Talk 18:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
My first thought is that there shouldn't be a category for articles lacking data in the "pregnancy_XX = " fields, only a scheme for those that already do, which could be extended to articles without the data as it becomes available (i.e., as we go over the FDA website and these documents and add the info to the articles :) Am I making any sense here? As for your second and third points, TGA is the Therapeutic Goods Administration, Australia's FDA/MHRA counterpart. Over there, some products don't have to have a category assigned to them; I'm not sure about the U.S. I do think "Drugs in Australian..." is better, and not that long a name. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
There should also, I presume, be a supercategory Category:Drugs by pregnancy category, with daughter cats Category:Drugs by FDA pregnancy category and Category:Drugs by Australian pregnancy category, to which the above specific categories would be added. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, all sensible points, and thanks for locating the links. I guess therefore more obvious to have "Drugs in American..." (rather than "Drugs in FDA..." ). Agree all 12 categories need be under one main category Category:Drugs by pregnancy category, whilst initially unsure re need country specific sub-cats, on reflection (a) might as well structure neatly 1st time around (b) allows more transparent intention for when/if we get any European classification etc etc and (c) allows more direct country specific reference from country-specific articles on drug regulation.
Unless anyone has further thoughts on this, I'll try and code up later tonight or tomorrow; before I have to pack for a 1 week holiday :-) David Ruben Talk 21:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Ooops two "obvious" coding approaches (#switch tag within category square brackets[1] or #Ifeq: to set each category call separately[2]) both seemed to fail to add an article to a category. I'm clearly doing something fundamentally silly here (?wrong use of includeonly tags ?). Brain fogg coming on, so may have to wait a week until after my holiday :-) David Ruben Talk 01:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Help with Alternative Names

The template {{drugbox}} is used on the quinine page, and the IUPAC name was entered as: (R)-(5-ethenyl-1-azabicyclo[2.2.2]oct-2-yl)- (6-methoxyquinolin-4-yl)-methanol. Unfortunately, this is not quite correct as it doesn't define the steroechemistries at the other three chiral carbons, and also the bicycle is often named based on quinuclidine, as: (R)-(6-methoxyquinolin-4-yl)((2S,4S,8R)-8-vinylquinuclidin-2-yl)methanol. I would suggest that the second name be listed as the IUPAC name, and the first as an 'Other Name'. Being bold, I tried to do this, but the drugbox does not seem to allow semi-systematic names in the same way as do chembox templates. Since semi-systematic names are common in both chemicals and drugs (like cholic acid which is often given as 3α,7α,12α-trihydroxy-5β-cholanic acid but for which the IUPAC name is actually (R)-4-((3R,5S,7R,8R,9S,10S,12S,13R,14S,17R)-3,7,12-trihydroxy-10,13-dimethylhexadecahydro-1H-cyclopenta[a]phenanthren-17-yl)pentanoic acid), perhaps an 'OtherName' could be added. I have left both names in the quinine drugbox. EdChem (talk) 05:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

class of drug or mechanism

I was just glancing at Ritodrine and noticed there should be something added to this template.

In the article it says it a beta2 agonist... why not put that somewhere in the template. It would help me to look up a drug and know what class it fits in and I can deduce the mechanism usually from that.

The mechanism should be added to more articles however, but probably isn't enough room in the drug box.

Thanks for all your hard work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.125.28.36 (talk) 03:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

We have that functionality in the combo drugbox (see thread above). Generally, proposals for additional fields haven't really gone through; as you mentioned, clutter is a concern. There certainly isn't room to add mechanism of action (at least not in a way it can be explained properly). That's really best added to the article :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Patent status or generic availability

In an earlier section, Remember (talk · contribs) and Fvasconcellos (talk · contribs) discussed the merits of adding a link to the FDA's Electronic Orange Book. As the latter pointed out, the Orange Book is an "excellent source for checking generic availability and patent stuff." I'd like to ask that a field be added to this template so that a drug's patent status is readily available. In lieu of that, a field that notes the availability of a generic version of the drug is an alternative. 68.167.248.158 (contribs) 11:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC).

Can't use ref with pregnancy_US

I attempted to cite a reference for the pregnancy_US field, and it displayed '?' instead of the appropriate reference. Please fix the template to allow a reference to be included. 68.167.255.125 (talk) 08:04, 28 March 2008 (UTC).

You can add the reference to the | pregnancy_category = field, e.g.
Pregnancy cat. B(US) [1]
| pregnancy_US = B
| pregnancy_category = <ref>PMID 12345</ref>
It will display like this (to the right):
The field isn't exactly meant for that purpose, but it works. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Retrofit topic-year headers

31-March-2008: I have grouped older topics above using headers "Topics from 2007" (etc.) to emphasize age of topics. Older topics might still apply, but using the tactic of yearly headers to note the age helps avoid rehashing old news, without archiving any ongoing issues. Also, new topics are more likely to be added to the bottom, not top. For clarity, I narrowed the Archive box 50% to allow a wider Table-of-Contents. -Wikid77 (talk) 02:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Patent information in the drug info-boxes?

I wonder if some patent information could be included in the drug-boxes?

for example:

  • the "basic patent" (that is, the first patent to be obtained on the active agent)
  • the expiry date of "basic patent"
  • the originator of the "basic patent".

e.g.:

  • the basic patent for Plavix is EP0099802, the originator is Sanofi-Synthélabo.
  • the basic patent for Ciprofloxacin is EP0049355, the originator is Bayer


After all, billions of dollars a year often depend on such patents. Indeed the big-pharmaceutical companies (in fact any pharmaceutical company) would not do any R&D at all if there were not a patent and the end of it, and so there would be no new drugs without patents! Also, the day these patents expire is often of great interest, as these dates often open the floodgates for generic companies to make cheaper versions, and thus cheaper healthcare for patients becomes available. Admittedly this information is not always easy to find, but what better place for this information to be pooled (over time) than in a quality encyclopaedia such as this! -- Quantockgoblin (talk) 00:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

No drug identifier vs missing value

CAS, ATC, PubChem and Drugbank don't apply for many proprietary & combination products in the UK, eg Paramax (paracetamol & metoclopramide). Currently the infobox shows a "?" if these parameters are missing, to highlight that the parameters need asigning values. However where the relevant US-based database have no entry on the product, then these fields should be blank. Any thoughts whether the parameters should be hidden or perhaps display "No entry" ? David Ruben Talk 00:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps blank for the combo drugbox, where there is less chance of the product being in a database, and "?" for the single-drug template, where the parameter if far more likely to be empty because no one's filled it in yet? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Range of temperatures

On Testosterone someone has put 

| melting_point=155-156

which causes a negative temperature. Please fix whatever template or pages are involved one way or the other. Bye. Jidanni (talk) 01:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, the fix is to use the melting_high parameter, as here David Ruben Talk 11:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Needs drug class added to drug box

Needs class of drug added to drug box. Just open lippincott's pharmacology and use that system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.43.212.236 (talk) 00:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.151.232.3 (talk) 18:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Please add drug class to the main drugbox, it should be added for more than just the combination drugs. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.151.251.53 (talk) 20:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Why CAS_supplemental always on a new line

Why does the template always show CAS_supplemental on a new line ? This does not happen with free text extra parameters of ATC_supplemental, pregnancy_category, legal_status. It would allow adding a brackett comment if required to the CAS value which this template automatically links. If no objections, I'll remove the <br> tag in the coding. David Ruben Talk 22:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done with now soft-space separator. David Ruben Talk 18:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The Interwiki Link to de:WP is out of date

This template should link to de:Wikipedia:Formatvorlage Arzneistoff. The current link target is obsolete. --Minderbinder-de (talk) 15:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

pKa and solubility

Would it be possible to add a field for pKa to this template? It is a property of major importance in drug discovery, and of interest to chemists and students of chemistry. --Itub (talk) 11:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Generally a conservative approach taken to adding extra parameters to this infobox, so I'ld await some straw-poll votes of support on this one. Personally I can't see this as being of any interest to the general readership. David Ruben Talk 22:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I support the addition of a pKa field. It is included in DrugBank, it is of medical importance (during overdose, you can titrate urine to accelerate excretion, but only if you know the pKa) and it also is important for for articles using Drugbox but also having non-pharmacological importance (like paracetamol). I also think we're ready for a Daily Med parameter, as proposed at Template_talk:Drugbox#Revisit_of_this_issue. --Arcadian (talk) 00:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Another question: is there any way of removing the automatic "mg/mL (20 °C)" from the solubility line? The available data is not always at 20 °C, and not always expressed in mg/mL. While I can could convert the units, I cannot produce a solubility value at 20 °C when the only available value is at 25 °C! --Itub (talk) 11:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Too many entries probably already use this note to ensure backwards compatability. A previous problem was editors manually marking up the unites (with all sorts of variations in markup, spacing and whether to wikilink "mg", "ml" and "C"). As I (very vaguely) recall, "mg/mL (20 °C)" is an international standard, but I appreciate not perhaps suitable in all cases.
Perhaps, if general agreement, then an optional parameter of solubility_units - where not specified the current default is shown, else a specific entry set up by an editor ? David Ruben Talk 22:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I support DR's proposal. --Arcadian (talk) 00:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Changing color of Drugbox to reflect its legal status

I'd like to suggest that {{drugbox}} be changed in some way to reflect a drug's legal status. At a minimum, any Category:Withdrawn drugs should have some sort of infobox change represent the fact that they've been withdrawn. Perhaps there are other cases where the the legal status should affect the infobox as well. 67.101.7.211 (talk) 06:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC).

Legal status where? A drug may be approved in some countries and not in others. --Itub (talk) 06:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

ChemSpider parameter proposal

Being proposed (away from this template's talk page, hence this heads-up) to add links to chemical property prediction site of Chemspider (also confirms chemical name and other reference numbers), yet even host of the site has expressed uncertainty that "... I am not sure that they belong on an encyclopedic article", see discussion at WT:PHARM#Chemspider_IDs. David Ruben Talk 01:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done per discussion at WT:PHARM. David Ruben Talk 13:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Ref in CAS number

I tried doing some cleanup of Alglucosidase alfa. There is an issue with the appearance of my reference in the CAS_number field. Any explanations?--ZayZayEM (talk) 05:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Not so much issue of infobox template appearance (at least not in IE), but rather it don't link to any useful page ! DrugBank states that is the correct CAS number, but DrugBank is not infalable. I don't think this is a DrugBox error (link works on other drug pages, eg atenolol), as http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2008/MBrowser.html search does not seem to come up with specific entry or registery value as far as I can see :-) David Ruben Talk 23:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Actually, ZayZayEM was referring to the "before": [3] The CAS field requires a cas number and nothing else, adding ref will break it. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 02:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

"Optical Rotation" area?

Hello. I recently transcluded most of a "chemical properties" section to the drugbox template in the (-)-2β-Carbomethoxy-3β-(4-fluorophenyl)tropane article. However, I am left with a bit of information that I do not know how to add, or even know if it is possible with the current template to add, called "optical rotation" (specifically it is given as - " Optical Rotation: [α]D = -62.5° ") could this a bit of information be made a section that could be added on to this drugbox template, or is there another section where this could be added that I have overlooked? Thank you. Nagelfar (talk) 00:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming this is Specific rotation but is it written correctly to be added directly as such? Thank you. Nagelfar (talk) 00:29, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
No, I think just need provide the (signed) rotation value. According to the article specific rotation, [α] is the symbol used, so "Specific rotation = [α]..." would be silly. The "D" seems from the article an assumed norm (but I have difficulty understanding the article and what gets used and when - so I may be wrong). Hence I've modified the parameter asigning thus. David Ruben Talk 01:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Line wrap in IUPAC names

Is there a way to make the drugbox recognize separators, such it can correctly wrap long names. As it is, long names horizontally expand the drugbox to huge size, such that it displays funny. I have now inserted spaces into the names behind dashes and that works nicely. But anyway, do we have the possibility of having automatic line wrap of similar functionality? 70.137.139.73 (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I've not seen any line wrap problems for a long time. We certainly used to have them, and fixed them by adding hard HTML line-breaks where needed. At present, the {{chembox}} is fixed at 30% width, rather than the 280px wdith for the drugbox – from memory, this was because of the line wrap problem. This is one example of a chembox with an extremely long IUPAC name which used to look really awful.
The problem with adding spaces after each hyphen is that such spaces do not appear in the real name. Indeed, hyphens in a chemical name are not always the best place to 'hyphenate' it! "2-Propanol" should be hyphenated as "2-prop/-an/-ol", for example, never to leave the "2-" at the end of the line. Physchim62 (talk) 11:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
For the chembox the problem has been fixed by making the IUPAC name hidden by default. See WT:CHEMS for discussion. Xasodfuih (talk) 18:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I indeed made the IUPAC name hidden in the chembox, like we did with InChI and SMILES there. Most of them are pretty unreadable anyway, but we can't leave them out. This solves problems with displaying of the page as it loads (if you show the long name it will still do bad thing to your layout ..), while still having searchability intact, and screen readers should also have no problems with this (it might even improve that).
Optimal would be to hide everything that is longer than, say, 30 characters, but StringFunctions is not enabled on en wiki (and a developer did not sound to hopeful that it would be enabled). Should we implement this also in this box? --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I guess so. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Support. --Arcadian (talk) 22:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Not sure, see discussion on talk chemicals. [4] The alternative names and pidgin iupac/nonsystematic/pharmacist iupac names common in literature have the same problem, and lists of them even more. And we can't turn everything into hide- and scrollbars. After all the chem literature also manages to maintain free layout for readability and page layout considerations in their books and periodicals. Also nomenclature in literature is far from standardized see Pubchem names vs. IUPAC, use of icosa vs. eicosa in IUPAC and Beilstein, Chem Abstracts and generally publicized materials. So I am afraid the machine readability and searchability is a wild goose chase or to be solved on the level of indexing and search algorithms and related lexical and eventually semantic preprocessing. Think of a chem search bar. 70.137.173.82 (talk) 11:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

The problem is mainly with the IUPACName, and just to a lesser extend for some of the other names (there are some that are way too long, but not too many, and not many pages x not too many users makes me a bit reluctant to solve those as well; maybe we can wrap the long ones in the template, not making the template do it for all). That other sites don't follow proper IUPAC naming (and indeed the question is 'what is proper') is not a reason to not try here to do it correctly; if more sites do try to become more correct, then we are ready for it, we don't have to go through thousands of pages here to 'make them correct, but in a broken format', and then again go through them in some time to 'repair the broken format'. I have tried to summarise the problem a bit on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Aaaaah! "Fixed" it adding line breaks... Doesn't seem right though. Horus (talk) 00:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Vaccines

Can we create a variant optimized for vaccines (as was done for antibodies)? --Arcadian (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll plan on creating this soon, unless there are objections or alternate suggestions. --Arcadian (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Suppose so, what had you in mind ? David Ruben Talk 02:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Drop the "Pharmacokinetic data" and "Pharmacokinetic data" sections, and add a new section dedicated to vaccine-only properties (target, live/inactivated/toxoid/subunit, number needed to vaccinate). For MMR vaccine and the like, I think we should use the combination drugbox, rather than make a combination version of a vaccine infobox. --Arcadian (talk) 04:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


OK initial trial coding at {{Drugbox/sandbox}} - needs robust testing at some point to ensure it does what it is supposed to when "type=vaccine", and also check I've not disrupted coding for other "types". It takes (so far) parameters:

  • target - ie the virus. This is a shared parameter also being used when "type=mab". Should it be automatically wikilinked here, eg enter "target=Hepatitis B vaccine" or "target=[[Hepatitis B vaccine]]" ?
  • vaccine_type - I've currently set to recognise only a select list of options, in order to ensure consitant terminology and also wikilinking to correct article. Options are per Vaccine#Types and aside from some additional synonyms are in essence: Killed / Live or Attenuated / Toxoid / Subunit / Conjugate / Recombinant / DNA
  • What does number needed to vaccinate (which redirects to Number needed to treat) mean in this context ? Do you mean degree of protection ? If so, that is normally given as a percentage, eg Hepatitis B vaccine#Response to vaccination states "a full response occurs in about 85-90% of individuals"


I should point out I have very little time to work on this as I shall be on holiday from next week. David Ruben Talk 00:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks good. I agree about number needed to vaccinate (and references would be needed to provide additional nuance). If there is no objection in the next seven days, I think we can move forward with your design (with or without NNV). --Arcadian (talk) 02:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
What of the issue whether or not target auto-wikilinks ? Would be simpler if no need to have editor add the square brackets, but I wonder if alternative display text (ie "[[virus|alt display]]") would be occasionally useful ? Also the section header of Vaccine needs perhaps rephrasing, eg Vaccine details ? David Ruben Talk 04:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd recommend not auto-wikilinking for now. I can imagine some scenarios where a vaccine target wouldn't necessarily map to a single existing page. --Arcadian (talk) 04:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
OK. Also I've made slight a tweak to the sandbox, making the section header read "Vaccine description", to see what anyone thought ("Vaccine details" seemed too specific and would be all the extra stuff like legal details, pregnancy usage etc etc, rather than this overview of what type of vaccine and what target), but "Vaccine outline", "Vaccine overview" are alternatives. (Holiday flight cancelled per BBC News, so a further day sitting at home). David Ruben Talk 19:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Sandbox Example 1

Hepatitis B vaccine
Vaccine description
TargetHepatitis B
Vaccine typeSubunit
{{Drugbox/sandbox
| drug_name         = Hepatitis B vaccine
| type              = vaccine
| image             = 
| target            = [[Hepatitis B]]
| vaccine_type      = subunit
| CAS_number        = 
| ATC_prefix        = 
| ATC_suffix        = 
| PubChem           = 
| DrugBank          = 
| pregnancy_AU      =  <!-- A / B1 / B2 / B3 / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_US      =  <!-- A / B            / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_category=  
| legal_AU =  <!-- S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9 or Unscheduled-->
| legal_CA =  <!-- Schedule I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII -->
| legal_UK =  <!-- GSL, P, POM, CD, or Class A, B, C -->
| legal_US =  <!-- OTC / Rx-only / Schedule I, II, III, IV, V -->
| legal_status      = 
| routes_of_administration = 
}}

Sandbox Example 2

Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine
Vaccine description
TargetStreptococcus pneumoniae
Vaccine typeConjugate
Clinical data
ATC code
{{Drugbox/sandbox
| drug_name         = Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 
| type              = vaccine
| image             = 
| target            = [[Streptococcus pneumoniae]]
| vaccine_type      = conjugate
| CAS_number        = 
| ATC_prefix        = J07
| ATC_suffix        = AL01 
| PubChem           = 
| DrugBank          = 
| pregnancy_AU      =  <!-- A / B1 / B2 / B3 / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_US      =  <!-- A / B            / C / D / X -->
| pregnancy_category=  
| legal_AU =  <!-- S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, S9 or Unscheduled-->
| legal_CA =  <!-- Schedule I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII -->
| legal_UK =  <!-- GSL, P, POM, CD, or Class A, B, C -->
| legal_US =  <!-- OTC / Rx-only / Schedule I, II, III, IV, V -->
| legal_status      = 
| routes_of_administration = 
}}

 Done - having realised that header for target should not specify "virus target" as not all vaccines are against viruses - doh ! Infobox template documentation added and see example at Hepatitis B vaccine (unneceassary parameters removed). David Ruben Talk 19:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I wonder though, is "live attenuated" just for viruses - ie are there any bacterial or protozoal examples ? If so then "attenuated" perhaps should point for "attenuated virus", and "Live" imply bacterial agents ? David Ruben Talk 19:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Per Immunology at Google Books, page 420, yes. (Use the "Search in this book" feature on the phrase "Attenuated viruses and bacteria cause immunity without disease".) Both bacterial and viral vaccines have inactivated and live attenuated forms. For bacterial vaccines, inactivated types include anthrax, cholera, pertussis, and plague, while live attenuated types include tuberculosis and typhoid. --Arcadian (talk) 23:58, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm. Inacitvate is current "killed" option, we just need show as "inactivated/killed". The attenuated though at least for viruses has a target page of Attenuated virus, but no equivalent target of attenuated bacteria. I'll suggest a proposed distinction of "attenuated" for virus and "live" for bacteria (viruses not 'live' as such until infect). David Ruben Talk 04:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Silver in chemical formula

Could an admin, please, modify the template so that it supports Ag? (See Silver sulfadiazine.) Thank you --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 21:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
 Done I used   for the color because, well because it's silver:) I edited the drugbox you mentioned to use it...color looks a little too light when displayed in the box, but not too bad IMO. If you find a better rgb coordinate, let us know! DMacks (talk) 21:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Looks good (per CPK coloring and this). Should we also add antimony (Sb), to support drugs like sodium stibogluconate? --Arcadian (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Actually far too light against the light grey of the template box, even I had difficult seeing silver against teh grey, so I've darkened to   David Ruben Talk 22:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Of course, why not? (Are there any reasons not to add all elements, except that it would be a lot of work?) --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 10:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Also would bloat out the template, plus there is just never going to be a Plutonium containing pharmaceutical or any of the other shortlived radionucleides. It has been on my to-do list (for far too long) to try and create a subtemplate for Hill system creation (ie Carbon, Hydrogen and then the rest in alphabetical order - except all in alphabetical order if no carbon, i.e. the hydrogen moves location). As a template, that might have a wider use in chemical articles as well as drugs. David Ruben Talk 19:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Synonyms

This is a minor point about organization ... currently the "synonyms" field shows up under the "chemical data" heading, but it would make better sense to have it under the "identifiers" heading. Can it be moved? -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Molecular mass

Some drug articles give the molecular mass without the unit (g/mol), some include it, sometimes wikilinked, sometimes not... Could this be unified, for example by adding "g/mol" automatically (as with the physical properties)? This would probably need a bot to remove all the units from the transclusions, though. Thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

MOA and better advertisement of adding "class" in currently used drugbox

Hello, I've suggested in the past http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Drugbox/Archive_3#class_of_drug_or_mechanism that MOA be added to the drugbox. I was shot down for lack of space. I would like to refer you to epocrates professional version if you have access. In a very short phrase, they are able to add the Mechanism of Action in their short line. I think we can do it to. Obviously there needs to be a lengthly prose explanation of the MOA in the article and it should always be a subcategory of the article. My other comment is about the "class" feature which is VERY underused in the drugbox. Linking articles by class is very important. However I never see it in articles even though it could be added. I am awful with templates and hope that someone else takes the initiative to incorporate these suggestions. I thank you for your time and ear. Please refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Drugbox#Combination_products 24.43.8.159 (talk) 00:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Pharmacology/Categorization#organizing_by_class_.2F_mechanism_of_action I suggested that we make better templates interlinking articles by class (NOT in the drugbox, but you guys that read this might be template savy ... for the bottom of the page on the articles) 24.43.8.159 (talk) 00:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Simple link correction: IUPAC name

The article for IUPAC systemic names is now at IUPAC nomenclature, not International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry nomenclature. The template as it stands forms an unnecessary redirect. Lockesdonkey (talk) 17:41, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Missing or no ATC

Looking at this discussion Template talk:Drugbox/Archive 3#No drug identifier vs missing value suggested that the drugbox should have option of ATC_prefix or ATC_suffix = none. This would be displayed as "none" in the ATC field, and could add the article to a category of drugs that do not have ATCs assigned (per discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pharmacology/Categorization#Drugs without ATC codes.

Also, suggest that articles with a drugbox where the ATC is missing be put in a maintenance category indicating that the information is missing.

I have drafted some code to do these things in the sandbox.

Handling of ATC_supplemental needs better handling (e.g., how to handle ATC_prefix not given, but ATC_supplemental specified.)

Thoughts? Suggestions? Zodon (talk) 03:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Support. --Arcadian (talk) 03:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Support overall, but should both category names end with "ATC codes", not just "ATC"? kilbad (talk) 13:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)


Good idea - updated the sandbox.[5]
Also updated it to display ATC_supplemental even if ATC_prefix not given.

{{editprotected}}

Please update the template using the code for handling the ATC parameters from the sandbox in this revision. Thank you. Zodon (talk) 06:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 Done. Please update the documentation, and let me know if anything unexpected happens. Cheers, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Agree use of 'none' value helps distiguish no existing code from merely that editors have not added it to the template, but why then show at all ? Can I suggest that if been specified as 'none' then the whole row is not displayed similar to 'DrugBank' which is not shown (but leave displayed if unspecified as the '?' to help alert editors needs sorting out). David Ruben Talk 08:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
I think that it's useful for readers to know that no ATC code has been assigned, especially professional users. Mistakes will be made, as always; but they can be corrected, as always! ATC_code=none at least means that someone has checked and not found anything, which saves anybody else from checking blindly. Physchim62 (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Can't search for ATC codes

Both the Wikipedia search and Google don't find the ATC codes that are shown in the Drugbox. (E.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=G04BX06 returns only the ATC overview page, but not the correct one for Phenazopyridine.) I guess the reason is that the ATC code is split up into two links. One option might be to create redirects for every ATC code. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaK (talk • contribs) 11:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Reposting this on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Pharmacology. MichaK (talk) 13:12, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:Chemical pages needing a CAS Registry Number

Shouldn't the Category:Chemical pages needing a CAS Registry Number go between includeonly tags to hide the template itself from this category? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Add alt text support

{{editprotected}} As per WP:ALT the images in a drugbox should have good alt text. I have added the obvious change to support this in the sandbox, and have documented and tested the result. Can you please install this change? Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 23:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

checkY Done. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Add discovery or first patent year?

It is a relevant information to compare drugs! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krauss (talk • contribs) 08:51, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Antimony and Bismuth

Could someone add antimony to the drugbox (see Sodium stibogluconate)? Thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 20:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

And while I am at it: Bismuth would be appreciated as well (Glycobiarsol)! --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 20:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

checkY Done, I can't believe no one got to this sooner :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Got pointed out to me that Antimony pentasulfide would not show the S5Sb2 formula as no 'C', 'H', 'N', 'O' at all in this (which is what was being tested for) - I've added in inclusion for 'S' too. David Ruben Talk 22:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Style updates

I've made some changes to the sandbox to bring this template in line with the {{infobox}} defaults. Key changes are the use of class="infobox" (rather than toccolors) to correctly identify the template as an infobox, the removal of the ID (as there is no guarantee that a transclusion will be unique; this previously invalidated the HTML of pages which included more than one drugbox) and a tweaking of the font metrics so that they are identical across all modern browsers. Comparison is available on the test cases page. Comments? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me, although it might take some getting used to :) Perhaps a note should be placed at WT:PHARM to request wider input, although I can't really think of a reasonable objection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
{{editprotected}} It's been nearly two weeks and there's been no opposition, so requesting sync. In addition to some consistency and maintainability gains, the sandbox code does not contain an id value which may invalidate a page's HTML. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 Done. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

US Controlled Substances Links Broken

{{editprotected}} In the "legal_US" section, the section links to Controlled_Substances_Act are broken. Instead of the form "Controlled_Substances_Act#Schedule_I_drugs", the links should be in the form "Controlled_Substances_Act#Schedule_I_controlled substances". All five schedules need to be fixed. --71.58.55.222 (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Since there is a possibility of the section names at Controlled Substances Act being changed again, I've used {{anchor}} at the article instead of changing the Drugbox code. Different approach, same result. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:02, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Molecule "weight" (again)

Hi Fvasconcellos and all!
There were already two short discussions in the past, namely

The correct term is still Molar mass - not "Molecular weight". If we repeat a wrong term, it does not become the right one. Obviously nobody believed in our own article (and all the references). -- Alfie±Talk 22:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: Forget it - I'm terrible sorry. In editing I was looking only at the field-name - just to discover that "Mol. mass" is displayed in the article. Oops. -- Alfie±Talk 22:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Verification process

As some may know, the Wikipedia:WikiProject chemicals is busy with validating the data contained in the infoboxes on chemical compounds. This is including many compounds with a {{drugbox}} (at the moment 326 of the 4018 pages with a drugbox (> 8%) has been verified). We started with verifying the CAS Registry Number only at the moment.

The {{chembox}} was already adapted to include a parameter 'CASNo_Ref', which notifies whether the 'CASNo' in the box is correct, and results in colouration of the brackets around the CASNo (no CASNo_Ref in box -> black, 'CASNo_Ref = {{cascite}}' (i.e., correct) -> green, 'CASNo_Ref = changed' (i.e., wrong) -> red.

User:CheMoBot is now in his second BRFA (see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/CheMoBot_2), where I have requested that the bot is adding parameters to the infoboxes he is monitoring (that can be regulated per infobox, drugbox does not have to be included). In short, CheMoBot compares the fields in the infobox with verified fields as written down on-wiki in an index of revids in which the fields is verifyable correct (for drugbox, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology/Index). These added parameters can be used to categorise the boxes, or to show the status of fields in the boxes in comparison to the verified revid.

The bot strictly adds/adapts the value in these parameters, it is not resetting the values. It is not meant to change the values back to their verified values (that might come in a next version of the bot, after a separate bot request).

The functionality is 'live' in User:Beetstra/Propane (an old version is indexed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Index), testing can be done freely on that page. The bot will adapt values about 20 seconds after your edit (in mainspace that will become something like 5 minutes, to allow for intermediate reversions and/or other edits, so that the bot does not annoy too much there). It is best to follow the diffs in the [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/CheMoBot_2]|bot request]] to see how different changes give different ways of displaying the infobox on User:Beetstra/Propane.

The {{chembox}} has been adapted to work with these status fields, and to show the status of, at least, the verified fields in a line in the bottom of the box. It is also able to show the 'correctness' of the CASNo by colouring the brackets. When (or if) this functions goes live, that should actually reflect the status of the CASNo in the chembox (and preferably also the drugbox). I'd like to hear some input from other editors here, if drugbox should also include a handling of said parameters, and how (name and content of most of the parameters can be set on wiki; I am not sure if the chembox is in a definite version there, but the idea is there). --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

update/revision request

Would an admin please add time to peak plasma concentration in the drug box. This is a standard pharmokinetic and useful information for each drug. Also I would like to open a discussion on the topic of source pharmokinetic data. Many of the common drugs listed only have animal pharmokinetic data available, and the drugbox does not have a way of informing the reader of the info that the data is coming from human analogs instead of humans. Thank you eximo (talk) 17:30, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Moved this section to the bottom of the page. Tmax is formulation-specific (not drug-specific); does not make sense to be included in the template. —Alfie±Talk 01:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Diagnostic MABs

Setting type=mab seems to result in the text Therapeutic monoclonal antibody under the caption. What about diagnostic (or prophylactic) MABs? Did I miss a parameter? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 15:38, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I've removed the word "Therapeutic". --Arcadian (talk) 23:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

International Units

Missed information about International Unit equivalent, which measures activity for some drug types (vitamins, antibiotics, etc.). This parameter allows to convert IU measure to milligrams of active substance. IU are defined for each drug in dedicated International Standards by World Heath Organization (http://who.int). Example of document: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/bulletin/1957/Vol17/Vol17-No4-5/bulletin_1957_17(4-5)_521-526.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aanabar (talk • contribs) 22:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Support. --Arcadian (talk) 23:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Aluminium chlorohydrate

What breaks the drugbox on Aluminium chlorohydrate, but not on any other page that I could find? --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:32, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Found it, I think. Will try to fix. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

PDB ID

Suggest to add PDB to the "Identifiers" section of the drug box. The Protein Data Bank (PDB) contains the 3D receptor-drug complexes of about 300 FDA approved drugs and many experimental drugs. An example of a PDB link is in the protein template at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiv_protease. The link to the PDB shows the PDB summary page how a drug interacts with its target protein. --DrPharm (talk) 04:39, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Code cleanup

I've done a lot of work in cleaning up the code further as we lurch towards parity with other infobox templates. Current code is in the sandbox and comparison is on the test cases page. The only visible changes are that (a) the headers are centered again (which they should always have been) and (b) the title has been moved to a caption rather than being displayed below the images, as is standard with infoboxes. Comments? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:09, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks good .. may I carefully point to the discussion just above here? --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
If you're talking about the incorporation of the code added here into this template, it should be trivial to add, yes. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
The code is this (slightly different diff), and there is a second part, which, in the chembox (actually in {{chembox CASNo}}), puts black (unverified), green (verified and correct), or red (verified, but now changed to something else) brackets around the CASNo (I'd like to see a different implementation in time there, but that also needs discussion). --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Requesting sync with the sandbox as this has gone two months now. Minor layout change for improved accessibility and conformance with MoS infobox layout. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:50, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Jake Wartenberg 23:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Patent-related parameters

Template:Drugbox/doc provides no guidance as to whether or how to use legal_status and related legal_* parameters to summarize the patent status, i.e. (1) where a drug is under patent, (2) who holds the patent, and (3) when the earliest patent applicable to the drug expires. The infobox is also missing the (4) year that the drug became available as a generic drug, if applicable and known. I searched this template's talk page archive and found minimal discussion about this.

I'm looking for comments as whether items (1) through (4) are legitimate parameters for this infobox, and if so, how should they be supported (e.g. as part of the existing legal_* parameters, as new legal_ parameter(s), or as additional parameters with names specific to the uses mention above. Thanks. 67.100.125.197 (talk) 02:22, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Drug's name

Suggest the drug's name ("Drugbox" on the template's own page) is placed above the picture of its molecular structure and in bold, i.e. as a title. 212.84.106.20 (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Just to note that this is now live. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Bug with parameter imagename?

Why does the drugbox display the drug's name and the imagename? ([6]) --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 14:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

fixed in the sandbox. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 Done synced —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

ATC links broken due to change by whocc.no

{{editprotected}} The old links in the format http://www.whocc.no/atcddd/indexdatabase/index.php?query=N06AA09 are broken.

The new format is: http://www.whocc.no/atc_ddd_index/?code=N06AA09

There's an additional parameter now to show an extended description. This is kind of nice, but pushes the info on the drug quite a bit further down the screen: http://www.whocc.no/atc_ddd_index/?code=N06AA09&showdescription=yes

MichaK (talk) 13:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

The new format for ATCvet is: http://www.whocc.no/atcvet/atcvet_index/?code=QN06AA09. "showdescription=yes" does not seem to have any effect for ATCvet. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 15:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Added the 1st w/out the extended description (any concerns, just ask for an editprotect again). 2nd, no problemo. Skier Dude (talk) 06:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Implement InChI?

User:Beetstra (Dirk) is adding InChIs and InChIKeys to drugboxes as part of his chemicals validation work. What about making them show? Probably not in full, but perhaps in a similar way we show SMILES. Dirk also suggested that the InChIs should be rendered to make them valid search terms. See User talk:Beetstra#InChI in drugboxes?. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 13:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

  1. ^ PMID 12345
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Infobox_drug/Archive_6&oldid=1146972147"