This is the<unk>  page for a new WikEM piloting a new section, called WikEM-Now.  Frequently, there are legitimate disagreements about what it the best management of a particular problem based on available literature.  The way such debate traditionally (and mostly still) works is that there are articles back in forth in journals and then (maybe) standard textbooks give their opinion or a medical society comes up with some guideline.
However, in all of these, a select (small) group of people give their opinion and there are always concerns about the impartiality of these select journal and text writers or those on the committees.  Cochran, the NNT, and other such lit reviewers are perhaps less biased, but are similar in that a small select group (or sometimes just an individual) is telling everyone else what to do.  This approach is top down and very last century, although still the predominant model.
For web 2.0+, you can add in the blogs and social media, which function like the journal articles of prior, accept have more people contributing than could be found in the journals.  These sites do not have to get "peer reviewed," so it is more democratic.  However, this approach causes more chaos and it is hard to say what is the majority (as opposed to the loudest) opinion.  These sites also provide little utility in the search for quick management decisions.
Wikipedia has another method, in that they want to come to a page that is neutral with both opinions (e.g. the Israli-Palistinian Conflict).  However, many doctors come to WikEM because they want a usable answer "now," not a several page discussion of the literature (although it is good to also have that also available).  It is nice to know, when you are alone in your ED, what your colleagues reading the same information would do (i.e. WikEM-Now).
Now:Main
Now:Suggest a Topic
Portal:Categories
Harbor Macros: AMA
SCVMC:Main
Harbor Macros: Pediatrics
SCVMC:Onboarding
Widget:YouTube