Talk:Hypospermia

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): Eleon.ucsf, Erickim206, V.Kalsi, Future UCSF Pharm.D, Gdelosreyes1. Peer reviewers: Albbato, NP94925, N. Lee, Future UCSF Pharm.D..

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Foundations 2 2021: Group 11 Goals and Proposed Edits
Our goals for this article include:

1. Enhancing the article

2. Add more references

3. Add Diagnosis and Treatment section

4. Add Signs and Symptoms section

5. Add how people with cystic fibrosis can have this condition

6. Add how certain lifestyle factors may contribute to this disease state

7. Research to see if there is any prevention for this disease

(a)   Group 11 has reviewed all the references and they are now correctly formatted.

(b)  We have verified that none of our references are from predatory publishers.

(c)   We condensed two duplicates which were reference 1 and 2 and 3 and 4.

Hypospermia Improvement in Dogs Fed on a Nutraceutical Diet: Ciribé F, Panzarella R, Pisu MC, Di Cerbo A, Guidetti G, Canello S. Hypospermia Improvement in Dogs Fed on a Nutraceutical Diet. ScientificWorldJournal. 2018 Nov 1;2018:9520204. doi: 10.1155/2018/9520204. PMID: 30515064; PMCID: PMC6236808.

Coppens L. Diagnostic et traitement des séminopathies obstructives [Diagnosis and treatment of obstructive seminal vesicle pathology]. Acta Urol Belg. 1997 Jun;65(2):11-9. French. PMID: 9324904.

Robin G, Marcelli F, Mitchell V, Marchetti C, Lemaitre L, Dewailly D, Leroy-Billiard M, Rigot JM. Pourquoi et comment réaliser un bilan d'hypospermie ? [Why and how to assess hypospermia?]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2008 Oct;36(10):1035-42. French. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2008.04.021. Epub 2008 Sep 17. PMID: 18801689.

Peer Review by Group 21
The group which has edited this article has added a wealth of knowledge and significantly improved the page. Looking at the history prior to editing began, the article is unrecognizable in a good way! What started off as three paragraphs has turned into dozens of thoughtfully written, properly cited bundles of information. The group had ambitious goals for the article and it seems that they are close to meeting them. I can only imagine that they will accomplish goals that they hadn't even considered prior to the start of the assignment. N. Piri, UCSF Pharmacy Student (talk) 22:05, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Manual of style
The article tends to generally follow Wikipedia's manual of style well with some improvements that can easily be made.

Grammar
Run on sentences such as "For an example, drugs like spironolactone, cimetidine, and ketoconazole, which have an anti-androgenic effect can disrupt androgens in the glands and seminal tract and cause in a drop of overall production of seminal fluid and semen volume," can be broken up or restructured. Furthermore, certain words can be replaced with better options.

Inclusive Language
In the introduction, the word 'man' is used which does not encompass the entirety of people who might be affected by hypospermia. I suggest finding a more inclusive term to use here.

Lack of Subheadings
The article can be made much easier to navigate and follow by creating subheadings for each topic. For example, instead of numbering the causes, separate them by subheading so that readers might navigate to them by using the table of contents. Separate the paragraphs in 'Lifestyle Factors' with subheadings as well. These are two examples of where subheadings belong, but there could be as many as twenty or more subheadings added to make the article easier to navigate. N. Piri, UCSF Pharmacy Student (talk) 21:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

The group has made significant and substantial changes to the article that follow the "Guiding Framework." The group did well in creating neutral content, adding reliable sources, and having balanced coverage. However, the lead section and structure can be improved on:

1. The lead section is good and concise, but the third paragraph can be edited to make its content flow better with the rest of the article. One suggestion can be to describe the function of “seminal vesicles” and its’ relation to Hypospermia first before going into to the other information about fructose and acidity.

2. The Causes and Lifestyle Factors section may benefit from adding bold subheadings to make it easier for the readers to find specific information. This will also allow for the information presented to not look so bulky and overwhelming.

There are some areas to improve on in order to achieve the overall goals presented by the group:

For example, goal 7 is to “add images to this article” but currently there are none. Another example is goal 6, “add how people with cystic fibrosis can have this condition.” The article mentions “caused by the mutation in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene” but doesn’t necessarily talk about people with CF. Goal 5, "add Signs and Symptoms section" has also not been achieved.

Lastly, the edits made on this article do reflect language that supports diversity, equity, and inclusion. The language does not single out any specific ethnicity, race, or other demographics. The word “patients” was mentioned in a couple areas of the article, but it’s not in a diminishing way. Albbato (talk) 22:10, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Peer Review by NP94925
Are the article's recent edits accordant with Wikipedia's peer review Guiding Framework? NP94925 (talk) 05:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comprehensible ❌ - please clarify terms that a lay audience would not know such as "prostatic involvement", "glutathione peroxidase-1", and "ROS production".
 * Concise ❌ - please fix wordy sentences such as "Following this molecular screening step, if variants of the CFTR gene are detected, the work of the geneticist will consist, using computer databases, in distinguishing whether this...."
 * Balanced ✅
 * Neutral ✅ - see section below
 * Well-sourced ✅ - uses high quality systematic reviews and meta analyzes.

''Did the group follow through with their proposed goals?
 * Enhancing the description of Hypospermia in the introductory paragraph - the lede paragraph doesn't look like it was signficantly expanded, but some clarifications were provided for certain terms. I would recommend improving the language in the lede for a lay audience (for example, can you clarify what prostatic involvement is?). Also the lede doesn't appear to summarize the article, but rather include new content that could be placed in their own sections.


 * Add statistics on number of people affected by Hypospermia ❌


 * Add Diagnosis and Treatment section ✅


 * Add Signs and Symptoms section ❌


 * Add how people with cystic fibrosis can have this condition ✅

NP94925 (talk) 22:10, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Add images to this article ❌

Is the article consistent with WP:NPOV?

Overall, the article is accordant with WP:NPOV. NP94925 (talk) 05:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Does it avoid stating opinions as facts? Yes - phrases like "may improve" and "may prevent" are utilized when citing studies.
 * Does it avoid using a partial tone? Yes - it doesn't appear to endorse any treatments, studies, or services.
 * Does it avoid using puffery language such as legendary, best, great, acclaimed, gold standard - Yes
 * Does it avoid using poor quality sources or opinion primary sources? Yes - the article appears to use solely high quality meta-analyses and systematic reviews.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

More appropriate information has been incorporated into the article with relevantly cited article and linked Wikipedia pages. Structure seems clear with proper sections and in a sensible order; however, there is a lack of subheading which makes the article hard to follow or difficult to find specific information. Subheadings create different sections within each heading so general readers can look for the specific topic they are interested in. I would recommend adding a couple subheading under each lead section; for example, the "Lifestyle Factor" section can be further divided into different subsections like alcohol use, BMI, trace minerals, etc. Additionally, many of the medical or scientific vocabulary can be further explained in lay language or linked to the corresponding Wikipedia page if possible so readers without a medical background can easily understand or read further if necessary.

The group did not achieve all their goals. They have expanded the article with appropriate and relevant topics like "Causes" and "Treatments" but did not add statistics, signs and symptoms section or images to their article as proposed.

Most of the article is properly cited with secondary sources that are freely available. The last part of the introduction and the first listed cause is lacking a reference. Citation #3 needs to be properly recited. Citation #17 is not freely available and requires a subscription. Citation #19 is not a secondary source but is a primary source presenting original research. N. Lee, Future UCSF Pharm.D. (talk) 22:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)