: "Neither vitamin E nor selenium decreases the risk of prostate cancer and vitamin E may increase." (citing pmid ) If no reviews on the subject. A red flag that a journal article is probably not reliable for biomedical claims might be publication by a publisher that has a reputation for exhibiting " predatory " behavior, which includes questionable business practices and/or peer-review processes that. E.g., the article Genetics could mention Darwin's 1859 book On the Origin of Species as part of a discussion supported by recent reviews. Use up-to-date evidence edit Keeping an article up-to-date while maintaining the more-important goal of reliability is important. A reason to avoid primary sources in the biomedical field especially papers reporting results of in vitro experiments is that they are often not replicable 2 3 4 and are therefore unsuitable for use in generating encyclopedic, reliable biomedical content. The Wikipedia community relies on guidance of expert reviews, and statements by major medical and scientific bodies. Press releases, newsletters, advocacy and self-help publications, blogs and other websites, and other sources contain a wide range of biomedical information ranging from factual to fraudulent, with a high percentage being of low quality. Contents Definitions edit Further information: Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary and secondary sources, and Difference between third-person and secondary source In the biomedical literature: A primary source in medicine is one in which the authors directly. Biomedical journals edit Peer-reviewed medical journals are a natural choice as a source for up-to-date medical information in Wikipedia articles.