User:13svdo/sandbox

Welcome to your sandbox!

Link to Project Resource Page
Project Homepage and Resources

Practice Editing Here (Nov 23rd in-class Wiki session work)

 * This is a place to practice clicking the "edit" button and practice adding references (via the citation button).

Assignment # 3
“Proposed Changes”

All COCP users have a small increase in the risk of venous thromboembolism compared with non-users; this risk is greatest within the first year of COCP use. Individuals with any pre-existing medical condition that also increases their risk for blood clots have a more significant increase in risk of thrombotic events with COCP use.

“Rationale for proposed change.”

The Wikipedia article provided somewhat misleading information regarding the risk of thrombotic events or blood clots among health individuals. The article states, “Current formulations of COCP's do not contain doses high enough to increase the absolute risk of thrombotic events in otherwise healthy people…”. The purpose of adding this reference is to show that the risk of thrombotic events does in fact increase among otherwise healthy oral contraceptive users and moreover to demonstrate that risk is highest within the first year of use. This information can inform patients and providers that stopping and restarting COCs should be avoided, if possible, given the increase in risk of thrombotic events in the first few months of COC use, even among healthy users. Consistent use is potentially safer. The second sentence is not new information, but rather a re-wording of content already in the article. The purpose of this re-wording is to clearly synthesize the new information and original information.

Citation: Black, G. (2017). No. 329-Canadian Contraception Consensus Part 4 of 4 Chapter 9: Combined Hormonal Contraception. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 39(4), 229–268.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2016.10.005

“Critique of Source.”

There are limited concerns with this source. This secondary source is a clinical guideline from the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in Canada (a mainstream college). The guideline contains multiple sources of evidence (often review articles) to support claims. Moreover, the clinical review used a specific quality criteria tool to rank recommendations. This helps limit bias. Finally, the source is up to date.

There are some minor concerns that come with all clinical guidelines. First, the guidelines are Canadian, so there may be some minor bias based on the national context and group of experts who put together the guidelines. There is a chance different countries or institutions may come to different recommendations, however the proposed change above is well evidenced so this is unlikely. Physicians still encouraged to use judgement when making medical decisions while consulting guidelines.

What to post on the Wikipedia article talk page?

 * This will also be covered on Nov 23rd in class. Your group should use the below template to share an outline of your proposed improvements (including your new wording and citations). Article talk pages are not places to share your assignment answers. The Wikipedia community will be more interested in viewing your exact article improvement suggestions including where you plan to improve the article (which section), what wording you suggest, and the exact citation (Note: all citations must meet WP:MEDRS)
 * You will not be able to paste citations directly from your sandbox to talk pages (unless you are interested in editing/learning Wiki-code in the "source editing" mode). We suggest re-adding your citations on the talk page manually (using the cite button and populating the citation by pasting in the DOI, website, or PMID). You will have to repeat this process yet again when you edit the actual article live.
 * Talk Page Template: CARL Medical Editing Initiative/Fall 2020/Talk Page Template