User:Santosde/sandbox

" Article Evaluation" Santosde (talk) 04:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC) In the article about the US Census Bureau the information looks relevant but it provides a lot of detailed information such as the history, importance of census, and data collection. This article is very clear to read and it states chronologically the history of the Census Bureau and the outline of the article overall is easy to obtain information from. The article is neutral, as it frames all the points that are crucial to understanding what the Census Bureau does. When checking other references links there seeing to be reliable in the sources and the information is clear and understandable. I feel this article is very straightforward and does not give any under or over presented information. It seems to be simple and direct. After checking the reference links, I found only one that was suspicious. The Title 13 did not have thorough information or additional links to provide information; it seemed very vague and not legitimate. The rest of the references and links provided seemed to support the article. In the Talk Page for this article it shows the article is Rated C, which is of low importance, but it is part of 4 Wiki Projects. In the talk page a question is brought up regarding ethnic bias, as we learned in class that topic can be considered bias because people can choose their ethnicity or race so it is possible that that information is not documented accurately. In class we talked about how race is a social constructed idea and that for example “Hispanic” is an ethnicity, and in the Talk Page of the article this exact problem is brought to discussion. In the Wikipedia article it mentions how the Census is important because it allocates the House of Representatives, which is something we discussed in class. Nice job with the evaluation - Prof Hammad  Santosde (talk) 04:07, 13 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Cause-specific mortality rate – the mortality rate for a specified cause of death. copied from Mortality rate

Sun, Hongbing, “Temperature Dependence of Multiple Sclerosis Mortality Rate in the United States.” Multiple Sclerosis Journal. Vol. 23, no. 14, Dec. 2017

In this study the research found that Patients with MS are sensitive to heat temperatures which cause remains unknown. This study finds that the mortality rate in the USA in areas of the northern states is higher than the southern states. This study finds that MS caused 55,129 deaths within the 48 states between 1999 and 2014. The study was unable to find a clear correlation between temperature and MS deaths, however, it is suggested that more deaths are seen in the northern, low-temperature states due to an increased use of heat within homes themselves, inferring that due to the increased home temperatures that people suffering from MS could be more sensitive to that opposed to the actual environmental temperatures.

Case fatality rate (CFR) – the proportion of cases of a particular medical condition that lead to death. copied from Mortality rate

Tuner, Paul J., et al. “Fatal Anaphylaxis: Mortality Rate and Risk Factors.” The Journal of Allergy and clinical Immunology: In practice, vol. 5, no. 5, 2017. According to this research, only 5% of the US Population experiences anaphylactic reactions, but less than 1% of them end up fatal. With the increased education and research of anaphylaxis, health-care providers have been distributing auto-injectors of epinephrine to patients that experience anaphylaxis, which is a factor in preventing fatal anaphylaxis.

Benson, Michael D. “Amniotic Fluid Embolism Mortality Rate.” Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Research: vol. 43, no. 11, 2017. Nine studies were combined to measure over 17 million births with a recorded Amniotic Fluid Embolism Mortality Rate of 20.4%. One of the risk factors involved with AFE was a maternal age of 35 or greater. An important factor to note is that this particular topic has not been researched extensively and there are multiple different definitions of AFE and what is needed to diagnose it depending on the country or physician. Further research on this topic overall is necessary to provide more accurate data.

'''These sources are good additions to the article; however, they don't quite talk about issues that are related to our course - what are some things about mortality rate that we've discussed in class and could be useful in this article? Think also about the DTM and changes in mortality rates over time. Also, be very clear about where these changes are going. - Prof H '''

Peer Review
Hi,

I edited your article and had some feedback for you. First off, I think you covered a wide variety of information well and did not put too much/not enough emphasis on any particular section. As far as suggestions for improvements, here's what I found.

In the Use in epidemiology section, the 1920s should have an apostrophe: 1920's. Both definitions of stillbirth given in this paragraph also need end quotation marks.

In the Household surveys section, the wording of the first sentence is a little confusing. Maybe try rewording it to be similar to the beginnings of the other paragraphs in this section.

Finally, you might consider trying to find more updated data for the countries with the highest crude death rates and the leading causes of death around the world, just to make the article as updated as possible. Other than these small adjustments, I think the article is great!

Let me know if you have any questions for me,

Amber

Response, Hello Amber thank you for your feedback. I have corrected the sentences per your request. I have reworded the use in epidemiology section 1920's and I have added the quotation marks to the definitions of still birth. I have also updated the crude death statistics to the most recent 2017 data and I am still working on adding the leading causes of death in different countries around the world.

Peer Review #2
Hi,

I like that your additions to the original article are providing specific examples of some measures of mortality. This helps me as the reader to better understand the two measures of mortality you chose to expand on. Your sources are relevant and I like that the sources are recently published, it makes it so that the information is relevant and up to date.

Just a couple suggestions:

I noticed that in the last sentence in the MS paragraph/section, was a bit lengthy. I think breaking it up into a couple-few sentences would make it easier for the reader to digest the information that is being presented.

Additionally, I think it would be helpful to link your references/sources using the citation tool so that they show in in the references section at the bottom of the article.

Overall, the bulk of your additions look great so far, very good information!

~

Response: Thank you for your suggestions. I fixed the MS paragraph by breaking down the sentence into several parts. I have also linked my reference sources using my citations.