Medical eponyms: Ambiguity in search terms and the failure of contemporary databases

The inconsistent application of medical eponyms poses notable challenges to effective information retrieval. Despite guidelines from international health organizations and journal policies advocating for non-possessive terminology, the scientific literature remains divided on this issue. The use of genitive apostrophes adds complexity to search procedures and introduces ongoing linguistic obstacles that may compromise the accuracy of clinical and academic data collection. Database analyses – including Web of Science, PubMed, Espacenet and the Lens – demonstrate considerable discrepancies in eponym record counts, illustrating how term specificity can result in the omission of essential records and intellectual property documentation. This review critically examines the difficulties encountered in keyword and structured table searches and provides an overview of how advancements in artificial intelligence and semantic search technologies may address these limitations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Information Science
Published
2026-08-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515261475282
Primary Topic
Medical and Biological Sciences
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Medical eponyms: Ambiguity in search terms and the failure of contemporary databases

Lauren Wiggins, James Davis, Chris I. R. Gill, Cliodhna McCann et al.
Journal of Information Science
Medical and Biological Sciences
article

Medical eponyms: Ambiguity in search terms and the failure of contemporary databases

Lauren Wiggins, James Davis, Chris I. R. Gill, Cliodhna McCann, Karl McCreadie
article en

Abstract

The inconsistent application of medical eponyms poses notable challenges to effective information retrieval. Despite guidelines from international health organizations and journal policies advocating for non-possessive terminology, the scientific literature remains divided on this issue. The use of genitive apostrophes adds complexity to search procedures and introduces ongoing linguistic obstacles that may compromise the accuracy of clinical and academic data collection. Database analyses – including Web of Science, PubMed, Espacenet and the Lens – demonstrate considerable discrepancies in eponym record counts, illustrating how term specificity can result in the omission of essential records and intellectual property documentation. This review critically examines the difficulties encountered in keyword and structured table searches and provides an overview of how advancements in artificial intelligence and semantic search technologies may address these limitations.

Journal of Information Science
University of Ulster (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Medical and Biological Sciences
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.