WHO TCM Terminology: Cite the 2007 and 2022 Books Accurately

Start with the book, not just “WHO”

Two WHO terminology publications can look similar in a search result while supplying different entries and locators. Record the complete title, year, term code and printed page. Do not combine a 2007 quotation with a 2022 link because the English headword happens to match.

The 2007 publication is WHO international standard terminologies on traditional medicine in the Western Pacific Region, from the WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific. The 2022 publication is WHO international standard terminologies on traditional Chinese medicine. The latter’s official publication page gives 3 March 2022. Their titles describe different scopes; these records alone do not establish that every 2022 entry is a line-by-line replacement for a 2007 entry.

Keep the two publication records separate

The PDF viewer’s page counter includes front matter. It is not necessarily the page number printed at the bottom. “Page 31” without saying which counter you used can send another reader to the wrong place. Both locators are useful when clearly labelled; the printed page and entry code make the citation more portable.

The 2007 introduction also explains its use of complex-form Han characters and interchangeable wording separated by a slash. Those conventions belong to that document. Retain the actual characters and paired terms rather than silently rewriting an older citation to the spelling of a newer one.

Worked example: the same qi headword does not mean identical text

Open printed page 18 in the 2007 book and locate code 1.2.17. Its entry gives a broad traditional account, including a cosmological description and a medicinal description of nutritive substance and functional activities. The 2022 entry is much shorter. On printed page 19, WGM2#224 defines Qi as “The intangible, high-mobility nutritive substance that maintains vital activities.”

A comparison should preserve that difference instead of constructing a blended quotation. You can paraphrase the older entry and quote the newer sentence, but attribute each separately. A shortened summary is your editorial wording, not a third official definition.

A terminology definition explains language inside its framework. It does not, by being printed in a WHO publication, supply a biological test, establish a patient’s condition or demonstrate that a treatment works. The qi reading guide keeps that interpretation separate.

Compare concepts carefully as well as codes

The eight-principles example needs another distinction. The 2007 book has “eight principles” at code 2.0.15, printed p.80. The 2022 book has “Pattern differentiation by the eight principles” at WGM2#931, printed p.93. Both name yin/yang, exterior/interior, cold/heat and deficiency/excess, but the headwords and row purposes are not identical.

This is a concept comparison, not an asserted official one-to-one code crosswalk. Keep the complete headword and its chapter beside the code. The eight principles concern traditional pattern differentiation; the shared number does not turn them into eight constitution questionnaire types. The framework comparison explains that separate reading problem.

Build a citation another reader can repeat

First open the publication record and its linked PDF. Copy the title and year from the document or official record. Then find the entry, retain its code and Chinese wording, and note both the printed and physical page if useful. Copy only the passage needed for your claim; leave surrounding clinical descriptions out of a vocabulary note when they are not the task.

For a paraphrase, keep the exact source passage in your working notes and label your published sentence as a summary. For a quotation, compare spelling and punctuation with the PDF, including line breaks that may have been introduced during extraction. A search snippet or copied table image without its book identity is an incomplete reference.

Finish by stating what you read: for example, a publication record, an introduction and one entry. Downloading the complete PDF does not mean that every chapter or cited classic was reviewed. If you need a historical original, a later edition or evidence of an outcome, record that as a different source task.

Practice on one deliberately flawed reference

Fictional editorial example: an article says “WHO 2022, qi, code 1.2.17, p.31” and links to the 2022 PDF. The code does not match that book. Page 31 may also be the physical counter rather than the printed number. The note is not ready merely because its link opens.

A corrected reference for the shorter sentence would identify the 2022 title, WGM2#224 and printed p.19, optionally adding physical PDF page 31. A reference for the older passage would identify the 2007 title, code 1.2.17 and printed p.18. Choose the source of the actual words; do not repair the reference by guessing the author’s intention.

Use the record below for a single entry. For general source-purpose questions, return to matching a reference to a claim. That existing guide remains the place for abstracts, review dates and clinical evidence boundaries.

Keep an original editable source record

Download the source-reading record (TXT) and keep the publication, exact wording and unresolved questions together.

WHO TERMINOLOGY CITATION RECORD — original reading aid
Complete publication title:
Publishing body and year / stated publication date:
Official publication-record URL:
Exact PDF URL and access date:
English headword:
Chinese characters exactly as printed:
Entry code, including its code-system label:
Chapter or section:
Printed page:
Physical PDF page in this downloaded file:
Exact source passage kept in my own working notes:
My text: quotation / attributed paraphrase / unresolved:
Scope actually read:
What this source supports:
What needs a different source:
This record locates text. It does not assess health or treatment.