User:Kmartsbest/sandbox

Article Evaluation
I think that the Medical Error article is not neutral. It is stated that medical errors are more likely a result from outdated or poor systems than an incompetent worker, yet the causes and examples listed are almost solely mistakes made by individuals. It also does nothing to explain how an individual could have made this mistake or expressing the commonality of it. I also do not believe the misdiagnosis section, also placing blame on an individual, to be a relevant section because it’s focus is on mental health. Unfortunately, many mental health issues are diagnosed based on the lack of evidence to support other diagnoses and are treated by a trial basis. This is not a medical error, there is simply no other means to determine illness. As for facts and citations, some of the statistics do not add up and many should be updated because they are over five years old. For example, the first paragraph suggests inaccuracies in a 2013 global study because of another study conducted in 2016, but the data could vary due to the time difference. Lastly, not every reference is verifiable because prefaces and non-full text documents are cited, nor are they reliable because web sources and not academic are used.

The article is a B-Class article for medicine, which I was surprised to see, because I thought that meant it needed almost no improvement, but a C-Class for philosophy. The talk page also seems unprofessional, but many focus on the inaccuracies and “ballpark” figures, as well as, what should define a medical error. I think the biggest variant in how Wiki talks about medical errors and how we are taught in school is that it is not incompetence that causes them and they can easily happen, so we focus on how to prevent them and improve the process. The section on after an error occurs is barley factual and doesn’t focus on legal or typical policies and the prevention section has barley any information. Having a more factual representation of what happens after a medical error has occurred would help greatly in showing the process of patient recovery. Providing a prevention section would help us to notice red flags when they pop up in unexpected situations.

Wiki Article 1: Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS)
This article has no information, we would be starting from the ground up explaining what PEWS is, how it is used, when to use it, etc. Providing facts about how PEWS can be beneficial in areas like labor and delivery, postpartum, and in the NICU. Along with providing scenarios of how PEWS has been beneficial in the past.

Wiki Article 2: Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU)
This article has very little information on the history and levels of a PICU. We could add additional information to these existing headings and add information on the type of patients and care received or the guidelines, equipment, and personnel needed to be established as a PICU.

Final Article: Pediatric Early Warning Score (PEWS)
In creating a new article on PEWS, I think it would be valuable to discuss the background on the importance of early recognition on deterioration on how there is a lack of standardization in pediatric cases compared to critical care adult patients. Then what the scoring is, how it is applied, and what it aims to do should be defined. Furthermore, there should be a section on the effectiveness of PEWS. So far, through research, there seems to be a lack of information on the effectiveness, but the plan is to further explore this, and explore where it comes from. For example, is it because there is not a standardized method of scoring? Further exploration of this could also lead to a section on what needs to be done to improve pediatric emergent care.

'''PEWS Draft --> A new article is being created, so please follow this link to review the information that is on the page. It is all information gathered for the project and I will submit for it to be published at the end. For peer review conversations, use the draft's talk page. Thanks!'''

Possible Sources:
Jensen, C. S., Aagaard, H., Olesen, H. V., and Kirkegaard, H. (2017). A multicenter, randomized intervention study of the paediatric early warning score: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials, 18(267), 1-9. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2011-7

Fuijkschot, J., Verhout, B., Lemson, J., Draaisma, M. T., and Loeffen, L. C. (2015). Validation of a paediatric early warning score: first results and implications of usage. European Journal of Pediatrics, 174, 15-21. doi: 10.1007/s00431-014-2357-8