Talk:Hyperandrogenism

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 June 2020 and 21 August 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): D. Doan, A.Chhen01, M.DuranUCSF, A.Kumar, UCSF.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 June 2021 and 27 August 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dlee234, Dkennebrew UCSF23, Dbhaskar13, Dpurohit, Class of 2023. Peer reviewers: R. Park, future ucsf pharm D.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Seasea92, Ale garcardiel, Medina berenice, Laguliar365, Emilylespier, Tatianamaldo09.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

See
See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine/Archive 9.

Intersex individuals
How this article can discuss the sports issue without acknowledging the fact that some of the athletes in question are neither biologically male nor biologically female (intersex) is a real puzzle, and intellectually dishonest. The fact that all medals in some Olympic races were taken by intersex runners should at least be discussed. Avocats (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Overlap between the sexes
It is very misleading to claim that there is total overlap between the sexes in regard to testosterone in blood, as the current entry does.

The quoted article (Healy et al 2014) does assert that "there is complete overlap between the sexes" as a subordinate sentence in: "13.7% of women had high levels with complete overlap between the sexes", and that "...the mean values differ."

The original article states in the conclusion: "We have shown that despite differences in mean testosterone level between genders, there is complete overlap of the range of concentrations seen." The "range" of concentrations is different to "complete overlap" - my understanding is that the sentence "The testosterone values show a complete overlap between men and women although the mean values differ" in the results, and "whereas 13.7% of women had high levels with complete overlap between the sexes" in the abstract refer to overlap of ranges, not complete confluence or being identical. 49.180.140.183 (talk) 23:19, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

The proper interpretation is: given that the man values are so different to begin with, there is little overlap between the sexes. In the case of women, 13.7% overlap with men's (with respect to standard reference values) according to the authors.

I'd go even further. As can be seen in fig. 1 of the same article, for all practical purposes the testosterone values for men and women overlap very little in their own tests (as opposed to general reference values). Only 14 out of 446 values for men (3%) could conceivably come from a woman (T<4); conversely, only 18 out of 234 values from female athletes (7.7%) could come from a man (T>=4).

As can be seen, the overlap is very far from "total".

There is a complicated agenda behind the subject I won't get into.

Somebody else can fix the entry if they wish.

(This issue is totally separate to whether the levels of testosterone affect performance.)

189.130.201.31 (talk) 05:48, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Student editing
Hyperandrogenism seems to be edited at present by members of Wiki Ed/UC Berkeley/IB35AC Wikipedia Project- Section 109 (Fall) without notification on this page. Please be mindful of WP:BLP. There is extensive coverage of added material already at Sex verification in sports. Signposting is good. Trankuility (talk) 12:32, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

diagnosis section

 * ..I have access to this review--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:44, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Faulty caption under Semenya's image
There is zero medical evidence for Semenya having hyperandrogenism. A physical examination a decade ago indicated undescended testes, that rules out hyperandrogenism. Semenya has never undergone genetic testing. That caption should be changed as it misrepresents the situation.--Tallard (talk) 04:19, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Caster Semenya DOES NOT have hyperandrogenism, she has "46,XY undermasculinization" which is very much like the OPPOSITE of hyperandrogenism. She is a genetically XY female (aka "genetically male") with partial androgen insensitivity syndrome (PAIS), NOT hyperandrogenism. To put it in the absolute simplest terms: a female with hyperandrogenism is a genetic female with androgen levels far above the average for women, and a male with hyperandrogenism is a genetic male with androgen levels far above the average for males - in other words, if Caster Semenya had hyperandrogenism, she would be one of those. And since she identifies as female, in her case, she would be a genetic female with a disorder causing higher than normal androgens. This is not the case, she is a genetic MALE with a disorder causing LOWER than normal androgen levels for males (in addition to a number of other physiological issues). This is not an LGBT nor a political issue, this is a factual one. Her inclusion in an article about a disorder she does not have is deeply misleading. I looked over the page, but found it difficult to completely remove her mention since it's tied up with the IAAF issue of genetic testing in sports. If anyone can find a way to artfully remove her mentions or at least include correct information in this article, please do. Remember, this is not a political issue, Wikipedia is supposed to be a source of correct information, and this is a fairly black and white issue. If you disagree or want to debate the issue, please bring it here to the talk page first. Bzzzing (talk) 19:46, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Correct, agree that references to Caster Semenya should be removed. I think the media wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume XX chromosomes and therefore theorized she had hyperandrogenism. We now know that assumption to be incorrect.

First section, first image: that's Cushing's, not high T...
I would remove it but my edits in med-wikipedia have been poorly received in past. Ellenor2000 (talk) 08:34, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


 * According to the article, Cushing's can cause hyperandrogenism, too. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:01, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Our team's gameplan is to - Make minor edits to allow for more consistent writing style and tone - Add to the diagnosis and treatment sections of the current article along adding sources - Add an epidemiology section to the article

Class of 2023 Gameplan
Our team's gameplan is to - Make minor edits to allow for more consistent writing style and tone - Add to the diagnosis and treatment sections of the current article along adding sources - Add an epidemiology section to the article

Foundations II 2021 Group 23 Peer Review
Yes, the group did an excellent job in achieving the listed goals (except including epidemiology) and improving the article. I liked how detailed and organized each section was. I can also see how much effort and time the group put into improving this article through the edits - the article is now a lot more consistent and easier to follow. One suggestion that I would add is maybe adding more pictures so that the readers can have a better understanding of how this medical condition would look like.

Are the points included verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available? Yes, they made sure to include each point with a verifiable cited secondary source to show the reader where they retained the information from. I checked some citations to see if they were from credible sources and they were.

R. Park, future ucsf pharm D (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Overall, the group's edit has made a substantial improvement to the article in accordance with the peer review "Guiding Framework". They formulated a game plan to make the article flow better with consistency and tone. The article seemed to be lacking important information regarding a diagnosis and treatment section as well as an epidemiology section. To improve this, they added detailed, yet balanced, sections for diagnosis and treatment, but I did not find an epidemiology section. I did however find epidemiologic information throughout the article in the signs and symptoms section as well as the causes section. They utilized a large amount of properly cited sources and linked many of the Wikipedia terms for jargon that the general population may not understand. As the reader, I saw a well-written article with detailed information that would allow me to easily understand this disease. Some suggested edits include 1) a bit lengthy initial summary which can be shortened because the information is already talked about throughout the article.(I.e. treatments varying with underlying conditions) 2) more visuals in the signs and symptoms section could be utilized to give the reader a better understanding of the varying ways the disease presents itself. (I.e. images for masculine appearances and Hidradenitis suppurativa) 3) fix grammatical errors such as "A study have also shown that acute high-dose..." 4) If possible, maybe add an epidemiology section for better organization and to improve ease of finding information.

Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view? Yes, the article is written from a neutral point of view. They do not suggest or promote any information, but rather present the reader with facts and what is currently known. They show the current lack of treatment for the disease and explain how the disease is often managed. They present information with balance and form an unbiased point of view.

Pchua001 (talk) 23:50, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Rroehl00 (talk) 23:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Peer Review:

1. Yes, I think the group's edits substantially improve the article as described by the "Guiding Framework". The information added was done so with relevant sources that were not biased and the group presented the information within the article to reflect a neutral perspective. For example, in the "treatment and epidemiology" section, there was a sentence claiming that, "[hyperandrogenism] occurs in about 5% of women in reproductive age" and this sentence was removed by the editor as they could not find any relevant, trusted sources to back this claim. This is marked improvement in the article following the framework as readers now have more reliable and reputable information they can refer to within the article.

2. Overall, I believe the group achieved most of their goals for improvement of the article. I can see through the edits and time the group members spent on editing the article that much priority was placed upon improving the grammar and overall structure of the article in an attempt to have more consistent writing style and tone. This was evident by the specific edits of changing "symptoms" to "the presentation of hyperandrogenism" in line 26. Also, in the "Cause and diagnosis" section, the phrasing of the information within the article from, "The cause in about 70% of cases is polycystic ovary syndrome" to "Polycystic ovary syndrome accounts for about 70% of hyperandrogenism cases." allows for more pointed clarification within the article, providing more consistent writing style and tone throughout the article (one of the group's goals). Upon reading the article and reviewing the edits, I found that changes were made that improved upon this and allow for easier reading of the articles presented information. Keeping this in mind, I know the group also had goals of adding to the diagnosis and treatment sections of the article. With many edits being made to the Diagnosis section, I think this was prioritized and achieved by the group. I think that the group may have found more relevant information that they wished to update in the Causes section of the article as many edits were made to the "Hereditary" and "Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia" subsections. The edits make vast informative additions to the article allowing for better understanding of causes for individuals reading the article. I believe, from the edits that were made, the group shifted attention to improving the current article for what it offered and to build upon that information rather than adding more sections, such as epidemiology.

3. Do the edits reflect language that supports diversity, equity, and inclusion? The edits do reflect language that supports diversity, equity, and inclusion. This is most noted by the following edits that were made, changing "females" to "women, and less commonly in men" in line 26 and across multiple areas in the article where previously "females" were addressed as having hyperandrogenism, the group included more inclusive language, focusing on the fact that this condition is also present in those who self-identify as males.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pjanday (talk) 03:28, 3 August 2021 (UTC) 1. The group did a great job in adding content to further expand on the page such as the diagnosis and treatment sections. The information was presented in a neutral tone where the information gave both general basis of the condition as well as going in-depth in the causes section describing different methods in which this condition of Hyperandrogenism may be caused. 2. The group has achieved an overall improvement as they were able to both fix the language of this article as well as add more relvant content to expand on the current understanding of this conditon. I felt that group did a very good job on keeping the writing style consistent as well by going from section to section was very consistent. From the edits and changes that were made with this article, the group was successiful in expanding on the work done on this page thus far. 3. Editing done on this page was consistent with the manner in which one should edit on the Wikipedia platform. When looking at the sources section of the article I was able to see that the cited sources were formatted correctly in which the year was only included. Also something I had really like with this article is the links that the editors provide taking us to other articles that may be helpful when reading this specific page. The language conveyed in a neutral tone where the information is presented without biases.

Source Review
All references have been reviewed and properly formatted. Here are the individual contributions:

Dkennebrew, UCSF23 reviewed #1-20 (no duplicate sources or reformatting needed)

Dbhaskar13 reviewed #19, 33, 38-39, 40, 53, and 56 (56 was incorrectly reformatted and is now correct)

Dpurohit, Class of 2023 reviewed #14, 15, 24, 42-45, 47-48, 50-51, and 72 (42 was identified to be cited 3 separate times and was consolidated into #42, and same with 50-51 which is now consolidated into 51)

Dlee234 reviewed #59-71 (70 and 75 were duplicate sources, and has been consolidated into once source as #70)

Need a mention and a reliable source
This article doesn't mention anything about "intersex" conditions. If you want to add the category it must be mentioned in the article and cited to a reliable source, per WP:CATV. Elizium23 (talk) 02:33, 24 November 2022 (UTC)


 * InterACT lists hyperandrogenism as an intersex variation in its recent glossary, it's an intersex-activist organization. What do you think? (I didn't edit the article, but I noticed the category being added. Xdtp (talk) 21:19, 24 November 2022 (UTC)