Practical guide
WHO Acupuncture Nomenclature vs Point Locations: Which Reference?
Choose the document that supports your exact claim. The 1991 scientific-group report proposes naming elements; the 2008 location book, checked in its 2009 reprint, has a different purpose. Record the complete title, copy and page. Neither a name nor a location entry proves a pressure product’s benefit.
Choose the claim before choosing the reference
“WHO acupuncture standard” is not a complete citation. It can refer to documents with different titles, purposes and editions. Before opening a book, write the sentence you want it to support: a naming convention, a descriptive location, a historical statement or a measured treatment outcome. Those are different questions.
For the proposed code and naming system in the 1991 scientific-group report, identify that report and its relevant section. For a description in WHO Standard Acupuncture Point Locations in the Western Pacific Region, identify the location book and the copy actually consulted. Its naming fields do not make it an effectiveness study.
If your question is whether a wristband or manual-pressure method benefits a particular population, neither a standardized name nor a location entry answers it. You need research on the actual intervention, comparison and outcome. A reference can help identify what a report means without supplying its missing outcome evidence.
This guide compares two actual documents, using their front matter and selected pages. It does not survey every national standard, reproduce a clinical locator or claim that either copy is the latest reference for every jurisdiction.
State the claim
Write the exact naming, reference-location or outcome question.
Identify the document
Save its complete title, author or issuing body, year and the copy consulted.
Find the supporting passage
Record a printed page and PDF page separately; keep the conclusion within that passage.
Identify the 1991 scientific-group naming report
The first document is A proposed standard international acupuncture nomenclature: report of a WHO scientific group, published in 1991. Its title and cover identify a scientific-group report. The cover also says that the group’s collective views do not necessarily represent WHO decisions or stated policy. Retain that qualification when describing this historical document.
Section 2.3, on printed page 3 in the checked copy, describes three essential naming elements: an alphanumeric code, a Chinese phonetic-alphabet name, and a Han-character name. Section 3.1, on printed page 6, presents the proposed structure, including an English translation of the meridian name. An English meridian name is not automatically an official English nickname for every point.
The contents distinguish 14 main meridians, 361 classical points, eight extra meridians, 48 extra points and scalp lines. These are named categories in the proposal. Eight extra meridians are not eight extra points; a point from an extra-point table should not be silently classified as one of the regular series.
For actual label comparisons, use the existing codes-and-names guide. It retains original strings and documents a particular bilingual correspondence. Do not extend one verified alias to every unfamiliar abbreviation.
On a phone, scroll the table sideways. Keyboard users can focus it and use the arrow keys.
| Field | 1991 scientific-group report | 2008 location book, checked 2009 reprint |
|---|---|---|
| Exact identifying title | A proposed standard international acupuncture nomenclature | WHO Standard Acupuncture Point Locations in the Western Pacific Region |
| Relevant purpose here | Proposed naming structure and source-qualified naming tables | Specified location methodology and reference entries for 361 points |
| Date information in the checked copy | 1991 on the cover and copyright page | Copyright 2008; “Updated and Reprinted 2009” |
| Important scope note | Collective views are not necessarily WHO decisions or policy | A reference entry identifies and describes; it is not an outcome study |
| A useful citation target | Section 2.3 or 3.1 for naming structure | Scope section or the exact entry used |
Identify the location book and the copy actually read
The second document’s copyright page gives 2008 and states “Updated and Reprinted 2009.” Both details matter. Calling the consulted copy simply “a 2009 WHO book” can hide the original publication year; calling it simply “the 2008 book” can hide the reprint statement. Record both before applying the citation style your course or publisher requires.
Its preface, printed page 1, says that the point names used in these guidelines are based on the proposed international nomenclature. Its Scope section, printed page 2, specifies location methodology and the locations of 361 acupuncture points. That connection between names and locations does not make the two publications interchangeable.
A concrete check is the entry “KI15: Zhongzhu 中注” on printed page 143. In this PDF it is page 152. Another entry, “TE3: Zhongzhu 中渚(渚),” is on printed page 159 and PDF page 168. The same Romanized spelling appears beside different codes and Chinese names. The separate Zhongzhu comparison explains how to keep those identities apart.
These examples identify entries. This guide does not copy their location instructions, convert diagrams into body-placement directions or tell a reader to apply pressure. If a document contains a foreword about a project’s importance, distinguish that background from results of an intervention study.
The location book’s foreword also mentions a revised edition of a publication titled Standard Acupuncture Nomenclature. That title is distinct from the 1991 scientific-group report used here. We have not read that separate book for this comparison. Do not replace one title with the other just because both concern nomenclature.
Keep publication, reprint, scan and page numbers separate
A PDF can have a creation or modification timestamp years after the book’s publication. An online catalogue can also change independently of the book. Those dates describe different records. A later scan timestamp does not establish that a point table was revised then, and a refreshed catalogue does not by itself make a downloaded copy a new edition.
Start with the book’s displayed publication and edition information. Then record the file or catalogue details separately if they help another reader find the same copy. When versions conflict, state the conflict and check the relevant pages instead of choosing whichever date is largest.
Printed and PDF page numbers are another separate pair. Front matter and unnumbered pages change the count. In the checked 1991 file, printed page 3 is PDF page 9. In the checked location file, printed page 2 is PDF page 11. These offsets describe these files; they are not universal rules for every scan.
Open the target page and confirm its heading and passage. A citation to printed page 143 should lead a reader to the KI15 entry, not to whichever page their viewer happens to number 143. Save both locators when sharing a direct PDF reference.
On a phone, scroll the table sideways. Keyboard users can focus it and use the arrow keys.
| Document | Passage or entry | Printed page | PDF page |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1991 report | 2.3: essential naming elements | 3 | 9 |
| 1991 report | 3.1: proposed nomenclature structure | 6 | 12 |
| 2008 book, 2009 reprint | Scope | 2 | 11 |
| 2008 book, 2009 reprint | KI15: Zhongzhu 中注 | 143 | 152 |
| 2008 book, 2009 reprint | TE3: Zhongzhu 中渚(渚) | 159 | 168 |
Build a citation someone else can check
Keep a short source note beside the sentence you plan to write. Include the complete document title, the author or issuing body shown in the record, the publication year, the edition or reprint statement, the source URL, and the exact section or entry. Add the printed and PDF page numbers as separately labelled fields.
For example: “The checked 2008 location book, marked updated and reprinted 2009, lists KI15 as Zhongzhu 中注 on printed page 143.” That is a bounded identity statement. It does not say that Zhongzhu is a unique name, that every standard uses identical wording or that a method has a proven effect.
Use your required reference style for the final bibliography. The worksheet preserves evidence rather than imposing one journal’s punctuation or inventing a publication date. If the copy lacks the information you need, leave that field unresolved and consult its authoritative record.
Download the blank document-choice record. It asks for a claim, source, locator and limit. It needs no personal medical information and sends nothing to this site.
For a specific point lookup, move to the relevant point or naming page after confirming identity. For a research-outcome question, move to the study-reading guide. Choosing the right document should narrow the task rather than collect citations that do not support it.
Check four complete document-choice cases
These original cases test citation and reference choices. They are teaching examples, not reports of actual patient outcomes.
Case 1
A draft says, “The wristband works because WHO gives its point a standardized name.” Does the naming reference support that conclusion?
Show answer and explanation for case 1
No. A naming reference supports identification, not the wristband’s outcome claim.
Keep the code-and-name statement separate. To assess the benefit sentence, identify research on the actual device or method, participants, comparison and measured outcome. Adding a correct reference title does not repair the missing effectiveness evidence.
Case 2
The copy says “Updated and Reprinted 2009” and its copyright page says 2008. Should the source note delete one of those years?
Show answer and explanation for case 2
No. Record the original publication and the consulted copy’s reprint statement separately.
The two dates describe different publication details. Preserve both in your source note, then follow the required bibliography style. A reprint statement is not a reason to silently erase the original year or assume every page changed.
Case 3
A colleague opens PDF page 143 and cannot find the KI15 entry cited on printed page 143. What should you check?
Show answer and explanation for case 3
Confirm the copy and distinguish the printed locator from the viewer count.
In the checked location PDF, KI15 is on printed page 143 and PDF page 152. Open the page and verify the KI15 heading. Do not apply the nine-page difference to an unknown file without checking its own front matter and target entry.
Case 4
A reference list says “Standard Acupuncture Nomenclature, 1991,” but the file actually read is the scientific-group report titled “A proposed standard international acupuncture nomenclature.” Can you treat the titles as interchangeable?
Show answer and explanation for case 4
No. Identify and cite the actual document consulted.
The location book’s foreword mentions a separate revised nomenclature publication. This comparison uses the scientific-group report and has not read that separate book. Similar subject matter and year do not establish that two titles identify the same document.
Sources and further reading
- WHO Scientific Group: A proposed standard international acupuncture nomenclature (1991)Cover, publication details, contents and selected naming-structure pages of the 1991 scientific-group report. Historical document scope, rather than an entire-book or current-policy survey.
- WHO: Standard Acupuncture Point Locations in the Western Pacific Region (2008; checked 2009 reprint)Checked copy states “Updated and Reprinted 2009.” Selected copyright, contents, foreword, preface, Scope and two identity entries support this reference comparison; they are not clinical or product tests.