Talk:International emergency medicine/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sasata (talk · contribs) 20:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll take this on, but before I post a review, I'd like some assurance that there will be someone willing to work on this (the student who submitted for GAN has not edited since December 10). Access to the sources used in the article will be essential. Any takers? Sasata (talk) 20:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm still around. As a college student I tend to be fairly busy but just let me know what you need and I'll see what I can do. Thanks. Mjs15 (talk) 01:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Very good; I'll post a review later this week. Sasata (talk) 23:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments
 * possible useful links: public health, developing world, white paper, critically ill, cost-benefit study, variable, curriculum, travel medicine, field medicine, infection control, disease burden
 * the lead is currently a bit US-Centric; is IEM offered as a fellowship in non-US programs as well?
 * "it was the high number of traffic and other accident fatalities in the 1960s that spurred by a white paper from the National Academy of Sciences that exposed the inadequacy of the current emergency medical system and led to" something's wrong with the grammar in this sentence
 * "These are conditions that potentially threaten the lives of those who are afflicted by them and yet adequate and/or timely treatment may not be available for much of the world's population." Source for this statement? If it's the same as the previous sentence, it needs to be placed at the end.
 * "For instance, a 2008 study of Zambia published by" It wasn't a study of Zambia, rather, it was a study of its "current status of anesthesia and its allied disciplines (intensive care medicine, emergency medicine, and pain therapy)". I'm worried that a primary source is being used to advance a position; has this study been cited in any reviews?
 * Arnold (1999) is the most frequently cited paper in this article, but it's now 14 years old. WP:MEDRS (particularly, WP:MEDDATE) advises us to "Look for reviews published in the last five years or so, preferably in the last two or three years." Have there not been any review papers that cover the same material published since then? Any textbooks? Any dedicated chapters in more general textbooks on Emergency medicine?
 * "EMS" is used as a shorthand starting in the "Models of emergency care" section, but is not defined anywhere
 * Hauswald and Yeoh is a primary study from 1997, and so not particularly MEDRS-compliant; can the cost-benefit argument be supported with a secondary source?
 * "In developing counties international emergency medicine is one among many initiatives" the subheader right above indicated this subsection is called "Developed countries"; should the underlined be "developed"?
 * "…international emergency medicine is one among many initiatives underway to shape the future of the specialty." Confused, isn't international emergency medicine the specialty?
 * "Its authors argue that attempting to cover all of those areas may be unrealistic and that a more targeted focus on acquiring necessary skills might be more productive." this sentence needs a citation
 * "Given the relatively young nature of emergency medicine as a specialty in the world as a whole there are" can we trim the underlined without sacrificing meaning?
 * "a far greater number of nations (50+) are in the process of developing those systems." this statement will become dated (see WP:DATED), so an template could be useful here
 * "Preventive care is clearly a crucial part of healthcare"
 * "Some money may be available from wealthier nations or international organizations but careful decisions still need to be made. Regardless of the amount of preventive care available, though, health problems requiring immediate attention will still occur and emergency medical programs could increase access to care." source?
 * Hobgood et al. (2009) isn't marked by Pubmed as a review, but the similar-sounding Singer et al. (2009) is; could you check if the latter source can be substituted?
 * "It is targeted towards all medical students in order to produce a minimum competency in emergency care for all physicians, regardless of their specialty." citation please
 * " As would be expected, countries that have" the underlined sounds like editorializing and should be trimmed
 * several dated statements: "The most recent conference took place in Dublin, Ireland on the 27 - 30 June, 2012."; "Up until now the conference has rotated"; "new members have been accepted in recent years"
 * "An important step for the advancement of emergency medical care" who says this is important? The authors of the primary source cited at the end of the paragraph? I can't find this article indexed in Pubmed, and it seems the entire paragraph is based on a possibly dubious source.
 * "An alternate route is providing additional training" an alternate route of what?
 * "This has the benefit being more rapid to implement as physicians already trained in other areascan add the necessary emergency skills to their repertory." fix grammar
 * "Educational opportunities in emergency medicine are simply not available"; "Botswana just opened its first medical school in 2009"
 * there is no need to define acronyms (eg. CEM(SA), EMSSA) if they aren't used later
 * "An important notion present in emergency medical systems development" Again, I'm not comfortable with how the article often tries to tell the reader what's important (especially when sourced to a primary study); please rephrase
 * "Despite the intuitive appeal of the thought that increasing availability to emergency medicine will improve patient outcomes" The suggestion that the thought has intuitive appeal sounds like editorializing; also the phrase "More to the point" soon after
 * the final two paragraphs need end-of-paragraph citations
 * please include pubmed id's to all of the the cited sources; it makes it easier for the reader to read the abstract and otherwise follow-up on sources (the template is an easy way to implement this)


 * There hasn't been any activity on this page since I posted the above review on Jan 27, and few substantial edits to the article itself. I'm going to remove this from the GAN queue now; any interested editors are welcome to use the above suggestions to improve the article. Sasata (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm working my way through the edits slowly. I'll renominate the article once I get around to fixing all of your concerns. Thanks for posting your review. Mjs15 (talk) 05:00, 15 February 2013 (UTC)