Talk:Brucellosis vaccine

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.

Pharmacology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology 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 Brucellosis vaccine.

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

Notability ?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As the current ref on this states "understanding and future approaches to vaccine development", this does not yet seem a product in current usage as still being developped. But until there is a product (after the research has decided whether live, attennuated or some other type of vaccine approach works best), should this article even exist yet ? David Ruben ^Talk 23:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

ATCvet then?

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Shouldn't the ATC code be ATCvet, ie prefix Q? -DePiep (talk) 12:32, 15 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Add topic