Talk:Photokeratitis

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Ophthalmology task force.

Metalworking Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking 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.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
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 Photokeratitis.

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

What causes this?

I really wish the article discussed the physiological cause of the condition.

Burning of the eyes by UV radiation, simple enough? Zulu Inuoe (talk) 10:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and rename

Arc eye describes the same injury (ultraviolet burn) as this snow blindness, just different situation and different rate of exposure/damage. Therefore they should be merged.

eMedicine article listed uses ultraviolet keratitis, but ICD10 lists as priority photokeratitis. Just as heart attack is covered in precised named Myocardial infarction, so WP:MEDMOS#Naming conventions indicates for medical topics to name precisely (and this acknowledged by WP:MOS before anyone cites to trump this).

So... at least merge into ultraviolet keratitis, I'm less pushy for photokeratitis. David Ruben ^Talk 01:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. in favor. it is the same injury from the same radiation, with pretty much the same treatment. It's just a different source.--MartinezMD (talk) 01:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2. I take me last phrase back - I'm in favour of photokeratitis vs ultraviolet keratitis: PubMed hits are "arc eye" 7, "snow blindness" 11, "ultraviolet keratitis" 5, "photokeratitis" 52. David Ruben ^Talk 01:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3. also in favor of the merge. Flash blindness is another one that needs to be merged in.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No to Flash blindness which is not a superficial burn but disruption (temporary or perminent) to the retina. Clearly a Nuclear blast will cause both, but these are not same disorder.David Ruben ^Talk 02:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- - Yes I withdraw this suggestion. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge of articles to title of Photokeratitis with other titles as redirects. Classify according to cause, I would guess? I've notified WT:WikiProject Metalworking as a courtesy. --RexxS (talk) 03:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge to Ultraviolet photokeratis. Photokeratitis can be caused by high power IR/heat, though, so if you have other corneal IR burns in another article, you have to use UV as a qualifier here. These are also separate from flashblindness, which is an effect on the retina, not cornea, and thus is not a keratitis and doesn't cause pain. A visible high power laser will also damage retinas but not necessariy corneas.
Also, note the problem that an editor has deleted the treatment section in arc eye. S B H arris 18:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should go with the ICD 10 term of Photokeratitis. This is the term also used by Uptodate. Can we request someone to perform the move?Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merged to Photokeratitis. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Currently Snow blind redirects here, but Snowblind is its own dab page. These should probably go to the same place. Is photokeratitis the primary use of snowblind? If so, Snowblind should also redirect here and the dab page should be moved (back) to Snowblind (disambiguation). If not, Snow blind should redirect to Snowblind. I think Snow blindness can stay as a redirect here. --Scott Alter 20:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have refirected Snow blind to Snowblind.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Now what we need is an image. I see this condition on a fairly regular basis but unsure how to get a good image through the slit lamp without a special camera. Anyone have one?Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welding goggles

This part needs more context otherwise it sounds like a joke: " welding goggles with the proper filters, a welder's helmet, " What is missing is the information, that Snow blindness often occurs after welding with unprotected eyes and not just during skiing. The first thing that came to mind reading this part was someone trying to ski with a welders helmet on...

I added the following examples to the beginning of the introduction to clarify: "to the ultraviolet (UV) rays from either natural (e.g. intense sunlight at high altitudes) or artificial (e.g. the electric arc during welding) sources." Thawn (talk) 10:51, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]