User:19djg3/sandbox

Welcome to your sandbox!

Link to Project Resource Page
Project Homepage and Resources

Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer

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

Assignment # 3

 * 1.     Outline your specific planned changes to your section of the article, labelled “Proposed Changes”. Target 1-2 sentences for your improvements. Use the exact language you plan to post to the Wikipedia community and ensure that it is written in a way that is easily understood by non-medical people. a.     Proposed Change: For women with Lynch Syndrome, CA-125 biomarker tests can be used as a tool to detect endometrial or ovarian cancer. This test should be done once per year for women with Lynch Syndrome.  2.     After each proposed change, briefly explain the rationale for the change and the reference(s) you have used to support your content. Label this section “Rationale for proposed change.”  a.     Rationale for proposed change: I’m proposing this change because currently the article does not mention this biomarker test as an option for patients who have Lynch Syndrome, but do not have confirmed cancer.   3.     Identify any controversy or varied opinions about planned changes in your section and explain how you decided to move forward with the position you have taken. Add this piece to the rationale section.  a.     There is limited controversy surrounding this test. However, since it is a screening test, there is always the chance for false positives. The parameters of this particular test are 95% sensitivity, 90% specificity. In a retrospective study of a population with 65 patients undergoing preoperative assessment of uterine cancer, CA-125 test had a PPV of 78% and an NPV of 97.   4.     Please identify any issues or concerns with the source (including any possibility of bias) and how (or whether) this has impacted your plans for the information you are choosing to share. Label this section “Critique of Source.”  a.     Critique of Source: My biggest critique of the source is that the source information for the systematic review was only from the USA. Coverage plans in the USA and healthcare costs can significantly impact a patient’s health decisions, and as such the generalizability and external validity may be impacted. Additionally, this systematic review focused on both cost and effectiveness, so there may be some studies missing as for my question I was concerned primarily with effectiveness. I verified the effectiveness of the CA-125 test by checking other secondary sources (e.g. CDC 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