User:DigitalC/Sandbox/Sports/

Introduction to Sports Chiropractic
This is arguably the most notable and integrated of the chiropractic sub-specialties hence this section. I strive for it to be an extremely high quality article that provides the best information with respect to chiropractic sports medicine. I hope that contributors will strive to bring the appropriate high quality citations (peer-reviewed when discussing a specific medical claim). Additional sections to be included, over time include:


 * Education, licensing, regulation
 * Scope of practice
 * Use of chiropractic in professional and amateur sport
 * Research into chiropractic sports medicine
 * Notable athletes using chiropractic care (i.e. Tiger Woods

Any other suggestions to make this article a model are of course welcome. Cheers. CorticoSpinal (talk) 17:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Another fine article started by you! Thanks for your hard work CorticoSpinal. You truly exemplify the spirit of good article writings as put forth by the founder of Wikipedia, Jimbo Wales. -- Levine2112 discuss 01:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * And, unfortunately, it's another fine example of the disruptive editing practices of certain chiropractic skeptics as they have nominated the article for deletion. The user in question appears to be Mccready.  I left him a note on his talk page raising my concerns. CorticoSpinal (talk) 16:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This could be a good test. Certainly come and weigh in your opinion at the AfD. Let's see how it goes. -- Levine2112 discuss 18:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The same attempts at censorship and disruption is occuring at Veterinary chiropractic. Where do I comment at AfD? CorticoSpinal (talk) 20:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Here. -- Levine2112 discuss 20:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a real good beginning. TheDoctorIsIn (talk) 23:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The sources are solid; and its the biggest sub-specialty in Chiropractic. How it's not notable when DCs are now part of sports teams medical staff, on the medical staff in the Olympics and most importantly, when Google Scholar gives over 4000 hits and at least 60 citations in PubMed is beyond me.  The skeptics here are ruining the point of the encyclopedia, which is to inform and collaborate. All they do is delete, delete, delete, and how a user such as Mccready and the usual suspects can simply silence and wipe out a notable topic like this makes me wonder why I even bother sometimes.  Their ability to influence and effectively censor experts and use straw man fringe arguments and kill budding articles like this harms the project in the long run. CorticoSpinal (talk) 04:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Musculoskeletal medicine
"Sports medicine core focus of treating athletes and promoting exercise which has also has considerable overlap with musculoskeletal medicine." Why do we have this statement? The musculoskeletal medicine referred to in the source is practiced by medical practitioners (MBBS - Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery), and is contrasted against sports medicine. Neither of these are on topic for Sports Chiropractic. DigitalC (talk) 02:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments? DigitalC (talk) 22:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

More Source

 * British Chiropractic Sports Council
 * Murdoch University (Australia) Prost Graduate Diploma in Sports Chiropractic
 * ACA Sports Council(USA)

Practicioners
Chiropractors, along with other non-traditional physicians, such as nurse practitioners are increasingly seeing their scope of practice augmented to carry out screening examinations on high school students engaged in organized competitive sports.blockquote>

The source cited doesn't support this complete thought. The source DOES support the fact that chiropractors are used more in cardiovascular screening (and presumably other activities, though that is not stated by the source), but the wording of the sentence seems to imply the opposite of what is implied in the paper. Chiropractors are the smallest percentage of non-traditional health care providers in the paper (see figure 2), and the only classification of health care providers to not see a statistically significant increase. This sentence, then, should probably be removed or reworded. Protonk (talk) 08:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Certainly word it as you best see fit. We're just getting off the ground here, so I imagine there may be several cases like this or where a further source is needed. Overall, I think it's a good start! Your help would be much appreciated in whatever capacity you can spare. -- Levine2112 discuss 08:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Reworded it a little bit to reflect that chiropractors are pretty tangential to that source. seems to be appropriate now. Protonk (talk) 08:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Role for chiropractors
The source cited for this is also very thin. This is an article that mentions chiropractors once at the introduction and once in the conclusion. The meat of the article is a discussion of the health effects of "spearing", a tackling practice banned in the US but not (at the time of printing) in Canada. Where the author mentions chiropractors it seems to be more of an exhortation than an illustration. he chiropractic profession ought to become directly engaged in all aspects of sports injuries and actively help developing systems by which it can be recognized as a core participant within the sports medicine world. Chiropractors can advise players, in lay terms, to practice the best techniques in order to reduce risks of serious injury. that's from page 11, the last page (not including references). I didn't include a sentence in the abstract, which basically says the same thing. There has to be a stronger source than this on to support the claim that chiropractors would serve to prevent spinal injury. Protonk (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Integration section
is a good source, but the text in this section is confusing. The text leaves the matter unclear as to the future role/limitation/etc for chiropractors. the source is rather more clear. This source can and probably should provide some more support for other sections of this article, as it is basically the scholarly equivalent of this article--a survey of the profession. specifically, the athlete-centered format for care needs to be a separate section, as it is one of the critical distinctions between the type of care offered by non-traditional medicine and traditional medicine.

Be careful when excerpting the article, as portions are interviews with subject and can vary wildly in tone. Protonk (talk) 09:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed that is it a good source and agree that other sections could use some of the important points covered by Theberge. It definitely seems, to me anyways, that this article is a good example of WP:INSPECTOR in which the AfD request was made very prematurely and it didn't have the time to be fleshed out and correct some of the points you've mentioned here and at the AfD page.  Nonetheless, if you could spare the time, I'd much appreciate some fresh eyeballs and thoughts and by all means insert what you feel would make the article better.  I'm going to try and get more sources tonight; just been busier IRL these last few days. Cheers CorticoSpinal (talk) 22:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No prob. I'm personally not a fan of chiropractic work in general, but what is important is changes in patient outcome.  If the patient responds to treatment, then the treatment is probably good, regardless of the causal mechanism.  I might dig through that source some more but others can to, as it is freely available from that link (unlike much of the material owned by blackwell synergy). Protonk (talk) 23:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent insight re: changes in patient outcome. Athlete-centered care is just a specific branch of patient-centered care which, in chiropractic medicine, (and maybe all medicine) is where the trend is heading.  Theberge raises many good points that I'll add to the article a bit later, I don't have time this weekend to do any significant work but do stop by periodically to check comments. CorticoSpinal (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)