Talk:Genital leiomyoma

Article categorization
This article was categorized based on scheme outlined at WP:DERM:CAT. kilbad (talk) 18:23, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Foundations II
— Assignment last updated by Jay9Z (talk) 17:17, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Foundations II 2022 Group 11 Proposed Edits
Our group proposes to add the 2 types of leiomyomas (uterine and subareolar), treatments, signs and symptoms, causes, and diagnosis. S.Li, UCSF (talk) 22:28, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

We currently have a few secondary sources and some case reports, but we are looking more into secondary sources. S.Li, UCSF (talk) 22:34, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

We will add classification under a diagnosis heading. Each person added at least 2 references under each subtopic. Jxamz (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Jxamz reviewed references 1-10; mtayag1 reviewed #11-20; Awong21 reviewed #21-30; S.Li reviewed #31-40 Mtayag (talk) 16:56, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
'''Question 1: Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wikipedia peer review “Guiding framework”? [explain]  ''' Yes, the groups edits do substantially improve the article. The use of lay terms makes the article easy to understand. The article is also organized very nicely so that it flows smoothly from one topic to the next. I did notice that there are four types of leiomyomas described, under "Types of genital leiomyomas" but only uterine leiomyomas are discussed under "Causes" and also under "Risk factors." Maybe add a sentence or two explaining that since the other types of leiomyomas are so rare, there is little to no information on their causes and risk factors. There are also a few small grammatical errors/ typos throughout the article.

'''Question 2: Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement? [explain]'''

Yes, the group stated that they wanted to add sections to discuss the two types of leiomyomas, treatment, signs and symptoms, causes, and diagnosis. Their article now contains all of these sections which are all very well developed and. They were even able to expand on their original plan and add four, instead of two types of leiomyomas.

'''Question 3A: Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view? [explain]'''

Yes, the article does reflect a neutral point of view. The group did a good job of presenting the information in an unbiased way, simply just stating facts. I also noticed that the group made a conscious effort to make the article gender neutral whenever possible, using "people with uteri" instead of "women" or "female."

Smnakamoto (talk) 16:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the feedback! We'll look into the causes and risk factors for the other leiomyomas. Otherwise, we'll take your suggestion and add that single sentence to explain that there's little to no information. S.Li, UCSF (talk) 21:10, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

'''Question 1: Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wikipedia peer review “Guiding framework”?

Yes, the group has ensured that the article has a lead section with a good overview of the topic with a neutral and objective voice, has a clear structure, has balanced coverage (i.e. different categories that expands on genital leiomyoma), and also cites reliable sources to support their content. The group also added images and clinical cases to enhance the article. While there is a lot in this article, the group did a good job of making sure to use layman terms to ensure it was easy to read by others. A source of improvement could be under "Risk Factors" because right now it seems like they're just for uterine leiomyomas so it would be good to clarify if they apply to the other forms of genital leiomyomas as well.

'''Question 2: Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement? [explain]'''

Yes, the group completed all the action items that were listed in their Talk page such as adding sections to discuss the types of leiomyomas, symptoms and causes, and also how to diagnose it.

'''Question 3B: Are the claims included verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available? [explain]'''

Yes, the group had many reliable sources that are cited after each claim. Most of the citations come from journals and a few are from case reports so overall, the group did a good job at selecting secondary resources and also citing them in a manner that is easily accessible for readers.

Aazad55 (talk) 16:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)Aniqa Azad

Question 1: Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wikipedia peer review “Guiding framework”? Yes, it has substantially improved the article as described. It has a lead content section that is clear and easy to understand, but still provides enough information to guide the reader on the topic. Lead content reflects the most important information described by article

Question 2: Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement? Yes, more secondary. sources were added, case studies were added, explanation, pathyophys, prevelance were added and explained throughly.

Question 3C: Are the edits formatted consistent with Wikipedia’s manual of style? Bold text Yes, format is consistent with manual of style; has clear headings and follows the following format: lead section, sections organized in an sensible order. Neutral tone and content are present throughout the article. Michelle.nguyen5 (talk) 17:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Question 1: Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wikipedia peer review “Guiding framework”? Good, concise lead. The content categorizes leiomyomas into different types, making it easy to read. It might be a good idea to switch the order of listing them so it flows better: Uterine, Vaginal, Nipple-areolar, Scrotal (most to least information).

For uterine: What symptoms does it cause under "only 30% of people with uteri experience symptoms"? An explanation of why it causes anemia is also recommended.

I would suggest just including Signs and Symptoms under each leiomyoma type, since they appear different for each one.

Not sure why Uterine is listed below Causes and Risk Factors, but assuming it will be updated.

Under Causes: revise "Long-term results suggests that diets that are mostly plant-based, composed of fruits and vegetables, and rich in Vitamin D have a positive effect on the development of diseases, including uterine leiomyomas." which makes it sound like it promotes the development of uterine leiomyomas.

Under Risk Factors>Age: rephrase "delay their first pregnancy past the age of 30" since language makes it seem that everyone with uteri gets pregnant at one point.

Under Genetic Factors: "A mutation of a single mesenchymal cell, a stem cell that plays an important role in making and repairing bone, and fat - found in the bone marrow and adipose tissues, with the involvement of progesterone and 17 b-estrodiol can lead to these fibroids" is unclear, rephrase this to be more concise.

Question 2: Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement? Yes, a lot more content is added that contributes meaningful information to the article.

'''Question 3D: Do the edits reflect language that supports diversity, equity, and inclusion? (explain) Bold text''' Yes. Overall, the language is inclusive and mentions people with uteri rather than women, and does not produce bias. See suggestion under Risk Factors>Age for one revision that can make it more equitable.

Jay9Z (talk) 17:58, 1 August 2022 (UTC)