Talk:Pagophagia

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): LCapistrano, Lauren.tweedie, LikiJNg, LHuang2023. Peer reviewers: J. Chang, Future UCSF Pharm.D..

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Plan for updating pagophagia article
Update references to reviews/meta-analyses written within the last 5 years

Make sure page conforms to Project Medicine style guidelines

Add a table of contents

Add clinical presentations section with signs and symptoms

Add epidemiology section

Add diagnosis section

Add associated with iron deficiency anemia section

Add clinical studies section

Talk:Pagophagia/Epidemiology
There's a lack of strong secondary sources on pagophagia. Most sources I was able to find on pica are nonspecific and don't delineate between different types of pica. There are a number of primary sources referenced - I'm open to feedback on what articles are of appropriate quality. Lauren.tweedie (talk) 21:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Foundations II 2021 Group 13 Proposed Edits
Part 1

The group's edits substantially improve the article, as they added and elaborated on signs and symptoms, epidemiology, and iron deficiency anemia. Group 18 added a table of contents, which makes navigating to different parts of the article easier and allows readers to see a preview of what the article has. They added causes and prevalence of pagophagia, possible treatments, and relevant dental injuries.

The group has achieved its overall goals for improvement, as the article has more details than it did prior to this project. The box at the top right hand corner which covers symptoms, complications, causes, risk factors, and treatments, gives a broad overview of the disorder. A few areas of improvement may be: 1. adding a visual to complement the material 2. summarizing the study results under the "Children" section in layman's terms J. Chang, Future UCSF Pharm.D. (talk) 21:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Part 2

1. The draft submission reflects a neutral point of view. The article is unbiased and cites various sources to support the material. Jerlam8 (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC) 2. The points included are verifiable with most cited secondary sources being freely available. There are some sources that indicate a subscription or purchase is needed. (References 2,4,5,7).They added citations at the end of the sentences to show where they pulled the information from, and those sources are shown in the "References" section. However, many of their citations aren't consistent with Wikipedia's style of citing, as the month and year are included in many of the citations instead of only the year (References 2,6,7,8,10,12,13,14,18,21,23,24,27). J.Choi, Future UCSF Pharm.D. (talk) 21:49, 2 August 2021 (UTC) 3. The edits are mostly formatted consistent with Wikipedia's manual of style. However, many of their citations aren't consistent with Wikipedia's style of citing, as the month and year are included in many of the citations instead of only the year (References 2,6,7,8,10,12,13,14,18,21,23,24,27). Jvalenciachavez (talk) 21:48, 2 August 2021 (UTC) 4. The group's edits reflect language that includes diversity, equity, and inclusion through the usage of "people" rather than "patients" and "researchers" in place of "scientists". J. Chang, Future UCSF Pharm.D. (talk) 21:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Review of References
Group 18 has reviewed all the references and they are correctly formatted. We did not identify any references from predatory publishers or any duplicate references. We decided to remove a reference (previously reference 19) that was taken from a Japanese journal because we were unable to determine it was from a reputable source.LCapistrano (talk) 21:26, 4 August 2021 (UTC)