User:Jyyyu/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
Current Sentence:

“More modern scores, used in the allocation of liver transplants but also in other contexts, are the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and its pediatric counterpart, the Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease (PELD) score.”

Proposed Changes:

“A more modern score, the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, uses three laboratory values (total bilirubin, creatinine, and INR) and is primarily used to determine the allocation of liver transplants. "

Rational for proposed change:

-       The article includes a brief description as to how the Child-Pugh score is used. Thus, for the sake of consistency, I included the scoring methods for the MELD score.

-       Prior to my edits, this sentence did not have a reference, so I added a reference to a systematic review/meta-analysis

-       In the original article, the language used to describe the use of the MELD score (“but also on other contexts”) was rather vague and warranted expansion. However, although the meta-analysis did discuss the specific study populations where the MELD score performed better than the Child-Pugh score, the authors concluded that additional studies were necessary to clarify the patients who should use each score for the assessment of prognosis. I concluded that the specificities were not necessary to include in a Wikipedia article and decided to rephrase the sentence.

-       I removed the part of the sentence about the PELD score because I could not find any WP:MEDRS sources that could be used so I propose to remove the information all together from the article

Critique of source:

Peng, Y., Qi, X., & Guo, X. (2016). Child-Pugh Versus MELD Score for the Assessment of Prognosis in Liver Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Medicine, 95(8), e2877. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002877

-       This source is a systematic review and meta-analysis and thus, has multiple reviewers, detailed methodology, transparency of selection criteria, includes article quality assessment (using QUADAS 2), and quantitative statistical analysis.

-       However, the review article is a meta-analysis of observational studies, which is not as strong on the hierarchy of evidence compared to a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Each individual study included in the meta-analysis may have been susceptible to selection bias or information bias due to the absence of randomization.

-       Not all included studies were eligible for meta-analysis and in some of the subgroup analyses, certain diagnostic tests (e.g. sensitivities, specificities, likelihood ratios) were not available, which may have led to potential bias.

-       These potential sources of bias would not affect the extracted information I included in the Wikipedia article because the level of detail in the meta-analysis was not explored in the Wikipedia article

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