Is it only clickbait if factually incorrect? Wouldn't that make the term redundant given that such a title would also be misleading?
Note that we're currently engaged in an unhelpful meta-discussion about whether or not the title is clickbait, which IMO is exactly what the guidelines are designed to prevent.
While I didn't say so earlier, I largely object to the needlessly inflammatory word "stumped" which perpetuates the meme that patients frequently know better than doctors.
This case is an interesting exception, not the rule. There's a debate to be had about the fact people do indeed know their own case history than their often time-starved doctors, but whether or not the article has merit, the title is a distraction.
