User:Eli 17/sandbox

Bold Be Bold

Week of February 5th Discussion: What's a content gap?
Assignment: Now that you're thinking about what makes a "good" Wikipedia article, consider some additional questions.

Wikipedians often talk about "content gaps." What do you think a content gap is, and what are some possible ways to identify them?''

I think content gaps may be pieces of information or fields of knowledge that people want to learn about, yet are not addressed in Wikipedia. These gaps can be identified by looking for Wikipedia pages that lack information (e.g. stubs) or search through the citations or linked pages in Wikipedia articles to look for insufficient/missing information.

What are some reasons a content gap might arise? What are some ways to remedy them?

Content gaps may arise from a disconnect from the background of Wikipedia editors and what the public wishes to know. It may also result from the specialty required to understand certain academic fields. Experts in these fields can help create these pages, and distill complex concepts into basic, understandable language.

Does it matter who writes Wikipedia?

To some extent, it's important that a variety of people write Wikipedia, so that a robust network of various perspectives and background can be used to attempt to objectively reflect the truth, or current understanding, of many different topics.

What does it mean to be "unbiased" on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of "bias"?

Being "unbiased" on Wikipedia means to fully understand a concept, be knowledgeable of how various perspectives on a topic are weighed, and to portray this knowledge without bias or opinion. Bias can come from use of improper sources, injection of personal opinion into the page, and misrepresentation of information. This is very similar to my personal definition of "bias," however, "bias" to me holds a more intention, while "bias" in Wikipedia may not be intentional, so it is important for users to check each other. Good job grade: A[  [User:RJBazell|RJBazell]] (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Bibliography - February 17th Assignment
I edited a Wikipedia article! Please see: GJB2

Laura Esserman:

http://www.ispytrials.org/trials

http://www.breastcancer.org/research-news/20131203

Week of February 19th Milestone: Choosing Wikipedia Article
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/Editing_Wikipedia_brochure_%28Wiki_Education_Foundation%29_%282017%29.pdf

In your sandbox, write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected article.

I have selected the "cancer prevention" article to contribute to this semester. Several subcategories of cancer prevention are listed, but not all are thoroughly addressed. Perhaps sections can be added to cover the specific roles of these factors (e.g. tobacco, obesity, diet, exercise, etc.) besides diet, medication, and vaccination. https://prevention.cancer.gov/about-dcp/historytimeline
 * Think back to when you did an article critique. What can you add? Post some of your ideas to the article's talk page.
 * Compile a list of relevant, reliable books, journal articles, or other sources. Post that bibliography to the talk page of the article you'll be working on, and in your sandbox. Make sure to check in on the Talk page to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19185802

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2838238/

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/69/13/5269

Week of February 19th Discussion: Thinking about sources and plagiarism
Information presented in blog posts may be infused with personal opinion, and information reported in press releases have not been verified for credibility and do not take into account the context of the information, due to its novelty. Both of these factors add bias the the reliability of the information, which cannot be appropriately placed in an online encyclopedia, or reference source. A company's website is designed to market and sell product/services, not to objectively inform and educate. Due to exclusion, overemphasis, or use of opinionated information, the website cannot serve as a reliable source about that company. An external, unaffiliated source would be more appropriate. A copyright violation entails the use of information or media without permission from the author/creator. Plagiarism is the misattribution of the authorship of information, including close paraphrasing and direct quoting without proper citation.
 * Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why?
 * What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company?
 * What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism?
 * What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism?
 * 1) Read the source and other sources to understand the topic completely. Then, present the idea/information in your own way.
 * 2) Check that you are not using synonyms to substitute information from a source word-by-word.
 * 3) Take handwritten notes only on important points or key words after reading an article, then reword these points afterward.
 * 4) Make sure to properly cite all information attained from an external source.

Cancer prevention
Cancer prevention is the practice of taking active measures to decrease the incidence of cancer and mortality. The practice of prevention is dependent upon both individual efforts to improve lifestyle and seek preventative screening and socioeconomic or public policy related to cancer prevention. Globalized cancer prevention is regarded as a critical objective due to its applicability to large populations, reducing long term effects of cancer by promoting proactive health practices and behaviors, and its perceived cost-effectiveness and viability for all socioeconomic classes.

The majority of cancer cases are due to environmental risk factors, and many, but not all, of these environmental factors are controllable lifestyle choices. Greater than a reported 75% of cancer deaths could be prevented by avoiding risk factors including: tobacco, overweight / obesity, an insufficient diet, physical inactivity, alcohol, sexually transmitted infections, and air pollution. Not all environmental causes are controllable, such as naturally occurring background radiation, and other cases of cancer are caused through hereditary genetic disorders. Current gene editing techniques under development may serve as preventative measures in the future. Future preventative screening measures can be additionally improved by minimizing invasiveness and increasing specificity by taking individual biologic make up into account, also known as "population-based personalized cancer screening."

Screening
Screening procedures, commonly sought for more prevalent cancers, such as colon, breast, and cervical, have greatly improved in the past few decades from advances in biomarker identification and detection.

Cervical Cancer
Cervical cancer is usually screened through in vitro examination of the cells of the cervix (e.g. Pap smear), colposcopy, or direct inspection of the reproductive system, or DNA-testing for HPV, considered an oncogenic virus. Recommended screening age is between 20 - 30 years, and women who are between 21 - 29 years old are encouraged to receive Pap smear screens every three years, and those over 29 every five years. For women older than the age of 65 and with no history of cervical cancer or abnormality, and with an appropriate precedence of negative Pap test results may cease regular screening.

Still, adherence to recommended screening plans depends on age and may be linked to "educational level, culture, psychosocial issues, and marital status," further emphasizing the importance of addressing these challenges in regards to cancer screening.

Colorectal Cancer
Colorectal cancer is most often screened with the fecal occult blood test (FOBT). Variants of this test include guaiac-based FOBT (gFOBT), the fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and stool DNA (sDNA) testing. Further testing includes flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS), total colonoscopy (TC), or computed tomography (CT) scans if a TC is non-ideal. A recommended age at which to begin screening is 50 years. However, this is highly dependent on medical history and exposure to CRC risk factors. Effective screening has been shown to reduce CRC incidence by 33% and CRC morality by 43%.

Breast Cancer
The estimated number of new breast cancer cases in the US in 2018 is predicted to be more than 1.7 million, with more than six-hundred thousand deaths. Factors such as breast size, reduced physical activity, obesity and overweight status, infertility and never having had children, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), and genetics are risk factors for breast cancer. Mammograms are widely used to screen for breast cancer, and are recommended for women 50-74 years of age by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). However, the USPSTF recommended against mammographies for women 40-49 years old due to possibility of overdiagnosis.

Vaccination
Anti-cancer vaccines can be preventative / prophylactic or be used as therapeutic treatment. All such vaccines incite adaptive immunity by enhancing cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) recognition and activity against tumor-associated or tumor-specific antigens (TAA and TSAs).

Vaccines have been developed that prevent infection by some carcinogenic viruses. Human papillomavirus vaccine (Gardasil and Cervarix) decreases the risk of developing cervical cancer. The hepatitis B vaccine prevents infection with hepatitis B virus and thus decreases the risk of liver cancer. The administration of human papillomavirus and hepatitis B vaccinations is recommended when resources allow.

Some cancer vaccines are usually immunoglobulin-based and target antigens specific to cancer or abnormal human cells. These vaccines may be given to treat cancer during the progression of disease to boost the immune system's ability to recognize and attack cancer antigens as foreign entities. Antibodies for cancer cell vaccines may be taken from the patient's own body (autologous vaccine) or from another patient (allogeneic vaccine). Several autologous vaccines, such as Oncophage for kidney cancer and Vitespen for a variety of cancers, have either been released or are undergoing clinical trial. FDA-approved vaccines, such as Sipuleucel-T for metastasizing prostate cancer or Nivolumab for melanoma and lung cancer can act either by targeting over-expressed or mutated proteins or by temporarily inhibiting immune checkpoints to boost immune activity.

Preventable causes of cancer
As of 2017, tobacco use, diet and nutrition, physical activity, obesity/overweight status, infectious agents, and chemical and physical carcinogens have been reported to be the leading areas where cancer prevention can be practiced through enacting positive lifestyle changes, getting appropriate regular screening, and getting vaccinated.

The development of many common cancers are incited by such risk factors. For example, consumption of tobacco and alcohol, a medical history of genital warts and STDs, immunosuppression, unprotected sex, and early age of first sexual intercourse and pregnancy all may serve as risk factors for cervical cancer. Obesity, red meat of processed meat consumption, tobacco and alcohol, and a medical history of inflammatory bowel diseases are all risk factors for colorectal cancer (CRC). On the other hand, exercise and consumption of vegetables may help decrease the risk of CRC.

Several preventable causes of cancer were highlighted in Doll and Peto's landmark 1981 study, estimating that 75 – 80% of cancers in the United States could be prevented by avoidance of 11 different factors. A 2013 review of more recent cancer prevention literature by Schottenfeld et al., summarizing studies reported between 2000 and 2010, points to most of the same avoidable factors identified by Doll and Peto. However, Schottenfeld et al. considered fewer factors (e.g. non inclusion of diet) in their review than Doll and Peto, and indicated that avoidance of these fewer factors would result in prevention of 60% of cancer deaths. The table below indicates the proportions of cancer deaths attributed to different factors, summarizing the observations of Doll and Peto, Shottenfeld et al. and several other authors, and shows the influence of major lifestyle factors on the prevention of cancer, such as tobacco, an unhealthy diet, obesity and infections.

=== History of cancer prevention === Cancer has been thought to be a preventable disease since the time of Roman physician Galen, who observed that unhealthy diet was correlated with cancer incidence. In 1713, Italian physician Ramazzini hypothesized that abstinence caused lower rates of cervical cancer in nuns. Further observation in the 18th century led to the discovery that certain chemicals, such as tobacco, soot and tar (leading to scrotal cancer in chimney sweepers, as reported by Percivall Pot in 1775), could serve as carcinogens for humans. Although Potts suggested preventative measures for chimney sweeps (wearing clothes to prevent contact bodily contact with soot), his suggestions were only put into practice in Holland, resulting in decreasing rates of scrotal cancer in chimney sweeps. Later, the 19th century brought on the onset of the classification of chemical carcinogens.

In the early 20th century, physical and biological carcinogens, such as X ray radiation or the Rous Sarcoma Virus discovered 1911, were identified. Despite observed correlation of environmental or chemical factors with cancer development, there was a deficit of formal prevention research and lifestyle changes for cancer prevention were not feasible during this time.

In the 1970s, federally-funded efforts brought the importance of diet and early screening in the prevention of cancer to the public eye.

1971 - Nixon signs NCA, federally-funded cancer research established.

1974 - Disadvantaged women benefit from NCI-funded ovarian screening.

1977 - Senate Select Committee on Nutrition publishes dietary guidelines for cancer prevention.

1978 - Community Hospital Oncology Program (CHOP)

1979 - NCI diet for cancer prevention: low-fat, low alcohol, increased fiber, balanced diet.

In the 1980s, early federally-funded programs and institutions were established to pioneer research in the field of cancer prevention.

1981 - Community Clinical Oncology Program.

1982 - "Chemoprevention:" Nutrients and compounds for cancer prevention. SBIR moves research to private sector. Smoking, Tobacco, and Cancer Program.

1983 - NCI begins chemoprevention and early detection research. Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP) and Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC) added to NCI.

1984 - DCPC research and clinical trials, meets with Kellogg company to discuss health claims in cereal publicity

1985 - Linxian China Dysplasia trial and ATBC cancer prevention studies

1986 - CCOP expands research to be large scale and include control groups

1987 - NCI guidelines for cervical and breast cancer screenings, cancer prevention fellowship program (CPFP)

1988 - Reagan signs Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act (mammography screenings)

1989 - MB-CCOP (minority-based community clinical oncology program)

In the 1990s, many chemopreventative clinical trials began recruiting. Often, these studies lasted for more than a decade, so their results would be released in the early 2000s.

1991 - Chemoprevention (synthetic and natural) studies, DCPC + Produce for Better Health Foundation begins 5-A-Day message (fruit and veggie daily servings), ASSIST (smoking) initiative

1992 - Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT)

1993 - NCI mammography guidelines are dropped (controversy?), prostate lung colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial begins (PLCO), FOBT test for CRC mortality, CAPS (colorectal adenoma prevention), enrollment for prostate cancer trial, NCI international breast cancer screening workship

1994 - ATBC results show causal relationship between beta-carotene and lung cancer incidence in male Fins

1996 - ASCUS/LSIL Triage Study (HPV testing)

1997 - DCP and DCCPS splits from DCPC

1998 - Tamoxifen decreases breast cancer (Fisher?)

1999 - EDRN (early detection research network) and RAPID (access to prevention) established

1999 - Tamoxifen and raloxifene (STAR) clinical trials began, APC (adenoma celecoxib trial)

The 21st century

Due to technological advancements, improved detection of biomarkers, and increased public and governmental support for cancer prevention research, the 21st century brought large improvements in the understanding of cancer genesis and development.

2001 - Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) Begins Recruiting Men over the age of 55 to test the effectiveness of these two dietary suppliments as prostate cancer prevention agents

2002 - Initial Results Released from the ASCUS/LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) on HPV Testing. HPV testing is found not useful for women with low-grade lesions due to the high incidence of HPV in women

2002 - National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) Begins

2002 - Results from the Colorectal Adenoma Prevention Study (CAPS) Released. Results indicate that daily use of aspirin can reduce the development of colorectal tumors by 35% in patients with a pre-existing history of polyps

2003 - Results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) Released

2004 - August: “Decades of Progress 1983 to 2003” Published. The first 20 years of the NCI Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), the precursor to the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), are documented

2004 - Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib (APC) Trial Suspended suspended based on an increased incidence of major cardiovascular events in participants taking celecoxib (Celebrex®)

2005 - Results of the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Updated. Results show a continued reduction of invasive breast cancer incidence as well as a decrease in some negative side effects, including increased risk of stroke, pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis

2006 - Initial Results of the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) Released. Initial results show that postmenopausal women who are at increased risk of breast cancer can reduce their risk of developing the disease if they take the drug raloxifene

2008 - Initial results from the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) Released. Initial results indicate that selenium and vitamin E do not contribute to the prevention of prostate cancer. In fact, test results suggest a slight increase in prostate cancer incidence in subjects taking vitamin E

2009 - Prostate Results from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial Released. Results show that screening men 55 years of age and older with PSA tests and digital rectal exams was not effective in reducing prostate cancer mortality

2010 - Early Detection Research Network (EDRN) Continues as New Grants Awarded

2010 - Alliance of Glycobiologists for Detection of Cancer Identify Key Antitumor Antibodies. They find that cancer patients produce antibodies that target abnormal proteins with sugar molecules attached made by their tumors, suggesting that antitumor antibodies in the blood may be a source of sensitive biomarkers for cancer detection

2010 - Initial Results of the Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST) Released. Initial results show that screening with low-dose helical computerized tomography (CT) reduced lung cancer deaths by about 20% among current and former heavy smokers

2011 - Lung Results from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial Released

2011 - Ovarian Results from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial Released. PLCO results show that screening for ovarian cancer with transvaginal ultrasound (TVU) and the CA-125 blood test did not result in fewer deaths from the disease compared with usual care

2012 - Colorectal Results from the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial Released. Results confirm that screening people 55 years of age and older for colorectal cancer using flexible sigmoidoscopy reduces colorectal cancer incidence and mortality

2013 - NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Approved for Start, opening the way for the program to bring state-of-the art cancer prevention, control, treatment and imaging clinical trials, cancer care delivery research, and disparities studies to individuals in their own communities

2013 - National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) Researchers Issue Finding on Overdiagnosis

2014 - Prevention of Early Menopause Study (POEMS) Clinical Trial Results Announced

2014 - Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) Findings Updated. Men who had high levels of selenium at the start of the trial, as assessed by measures of selenium in their toenail clippings, had almost double the chance of developing a high-grade prostate cancer if they took the selenium supplement

2015 - Cancer Prevention and Control Central Institutional Review Board (CIRB) Established

2015 - NCORP Sites Participate in Enrolling Patients in the NCI-MATCH (Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice) Precision Medicine Trial

2015 - Consortium on Imaging and Biomarkers is Created with Grants to Eight Principal Investigators. The consortium focuses on combining imaging methods with biomarkers to improve the accuracy of screening, early cancer detection, and diagnosis of early stage cancers

2015 - NCI Awards Grants to Create the Consortium for Molecular Characterization of Screen-Detected Lesions

2016 - The White House Announces $1 billion in Investments in the National Cancer Moonshot initiative. Prevention, including cancer vaccine development and early cancer detection, are two of the five opportunity areas

2016 - Ovarian Cancer Study Tests Lead Time of Potential Biomarkers

2016 - Largest Ever US Study to Research Causes and Genetics of Blood Diseases

2016 - Data from the Interactive Diet and Activity Tracking in AARP Study (IDATA) Are Made Available to Qualified Investigators

2016 - Olanzapine Helps Prevent Nausea and Vomiting Caused by Chemotherapy

2016 - Study Confirms Benefits of Early Palliative Care for Advanced Cancer

2016 - Think Tank Emphasizes Identifying and Creating the Next Generation of Community-Based Cancer Prevention Studies

2017 - NCI’s Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program (CPFP) Celebrates 30 Years

2017 - NCI Joins Leading Groups on Disparities Statement

2017 - TMIST Trial Aims to Provide Clarity on Breast Cancer Screening Approaches

2017 - Pre-Cancer Atlas and Other Human Tumor Atlas Network Funding Opportunity announcements Released

2017 - Experimental Ovarian Cancer Vaccine Shows Promise in Mice

Week 6 (03/04-03/10) Discussion: Thinking about Wikipedia
Wikipedia is meant to be a surface-level source of unbiased information, and is not meant to be structured as an argument or opinion piece. Neutrality is important to prime visitors' knowledge of a certain topic or field, not to give subjective perspectives/opinions of the topic. Wikipedia is edited and curated by the public, so there exist deficits of knowledge in certain topic areas. Additionally, the information is not always routinely updated as new reports or meta-studies are published. Despite this, Wikipedia is readily available to anyone who wants to gain a general knowledge of most topics, and helps keep the international population informed and connected. In general, material should not be sourced from blogs, unverified resources, single studies, or recent news reports. Due to these restrictions on the sources of information, sometimes, the most up-to-date information may not be represented in a Wikipedia article. Novelty is compromised for veritability. Additionally, first-hand accounts may often hold valuable insights that cannot be captured by a published article. History and its perception change as the public mindset changes, and despite our attempts to keep Wikipedia content neutral, at the very least, the weighting of various topics may have been different. 100 years ago, common verbiage or knowledge referenced today may not have applied. This lesson carries to 100 years from now. In order to keep Wikipedia relevant, accurate, and impactful, our practice of curating and editing Wikipedia must change as the times do. Our definitions of "neutrality" and of a "reliable source" may need to change.
 * What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"?
 * What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information?
 * On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?
 * If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?