Talk:Restless legs syndrome

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 Restless legs syndrome.

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

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Restless legs syndrome 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: 3 months

Medicine: Neurology 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.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Neuroscience Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience 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.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

All editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders are copyrighted. Do not post a copy of the official DSM diagnostic criteria in any Wikipedia article. Simply reproducing the entire list in the DSM is not fair use and is a violation of the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria legal policy. Instead, describe the criteria in your own words.
See Wikipedia:Copyright violations#Parts of article violate copyright for instructions if the criteria have been copied into the article.
Editors may quote a small part of the DSM criteria for a given condition, especially if that quotation is used to discuss the DSM's choice of terminology in that quotation.

A bizarre statement

In the opening paragraph this article states: "There are two main types. One is early onset RLS which starts before age 45, runs in families and worsens over time. The other is late onset RLS which begins after age 45, starts suddenly, and does not worsen."

What transformation, pray tell, occurs in the human body at age 45? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.19.57 (talk) 04:23, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of transformations happening in the body as it ages. Many of these are continuous rather than sudden, but aging-associated diseases might only manifest once they reach a certain threshold. In some cases we don't know what is changing to cause a disease to occur later in life, but we can reliably observe that it does. -- Beland (talk) 16:26, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You won't see this, but it may be helpful for others since that is indeed a bizarre statement.

RLS is similar to other age-related conditions in that the early-onset form carries a different prognosis and often a different presentation. It's not that 45 is a magical age at which one manifestation becomes impossible, as the article unintentionally implies, it's that you are more likely to have one or the other based on your age, and your age will determine whether it's considered "early-onset" or not. A 44-year-old could still develop a non-progressive form of the disorder, or the reverse, but 45 is still the cut-off point for "early onset." Such cut-offs are almost always arbitrary.

The original link is dead so I have no idea what it actually said or why. I'm making changes so that it's less confusing and also has a live citation. 2603:7081:1603:A300:2CC4:A198:82DB:C8BF (talk) 19:03, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is the condition restless LEG syndrome or restless LEGS syndrome?

The article uses both.

Choose one.

VickiMeagher (talk) 17:42, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've always known it as singular, particularly when referring to one leg. However, § History cites a source that uses the plural in its title, and there is the Restless Legs Syndrome Foundation. I would say this puts strong weight towards the plural form. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 00:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not dispute this but I too have always heard LEG. Moreover, restless LEGS syndrome sounds comical to me, like the urge to give oneself over to burlesque vaudeville dancing. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:8005:3B14:C6E:1AFB (talk) 13:43, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

History section cull and refinement

Deleted a lot of verbosity from the history section - done in good faith -

I noted a few further edits which are growing this section again - I think this section as is - is still fine - but if it has further adds - I think folks should discuss, it it better than it was - but considering the audience and WP:MEDMOS - it does not need to be any larger - I am uncertain why the need for history from the 1600s - but that is my humble opinion.

Regards Dr. BeingObjective (talk) 14:50, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MEDMOS article organization

Just to explain logic of my edit:

1. renamed some sections and reordered some sections so article would follow format suggested on WP:MEDMOS [1]

2. Renamed "treatment" -> "management", since seems to usually be a chronic condition with no cure.

3. There was a section called "diagnosis and treatment" in addition to separate sections for "diagnosis" and "treatment". Removed that section and merged any content which was not duplicate of info elsewhere in article.

4. Make a "classification" section.

5. Removed "controversy" section as per MEDMOS. Merged to "medications" and "history" sections.

Regards, Moribundum (talk) 19:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@FlightTime Hello, my edit was explained above. The guideline MEDMOS is linked above. Also, we should not have both "diagnosis and treatment" section and separate "diagnosis" and "treatment" sections.

Primary and secondary types belong in a classification section, it is not part of "symptoms". Many thanks Moribundum (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support your removal of duplicate content and clearer organisation of sections / information. Daphne Morrow (talk) 12:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support these changes. Another avenue for the content in controversy would be the “society” subheading. Although I don’t, off the top of my head, think that RLS is controversial enough to warrant too much focus on that. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 17:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

support changes (as above editors)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:31, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Society and culture" would also work for that section. Suggest that the para below might be worth mentioning at the beginning of the article... that is why I decided to put it under "Classification" in my edit [2]

A point of confusion is that RLS and delusional parasitosis are entirely different conditions that have both been called "Ekbom syndrome", as both syndromes were described by the same person, Karl-Axel Ekbom. Today, calling WED/RLS "Ekbom syndrome" is outdated usage, as the unambiguous names (WED or RLS) are preferred for clarity. (just saw that the last sentence has no inline citation...) Moribundum (talk) 18:24, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

user:FlightTime (ping again, not sure ping worked last time), do you have any objection to this edit? Thanks, Moribundum (talk) 12:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]