Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Medicine! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's medicine articles. While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project itself to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work. '''Anyone can assess articles. You do not need to be an administrator, or even be a registered editor. Please follow the instructions below to help out with this ongoing task.''' The Wikipedia-wide importance scheme and quality scheme are used.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the WPMED banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Medicine articles by quality and Category:Medicine articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

All articles under medicine project should try to adhere to Manual of Style (medicine-related articles). An article is unlikely to attract a grade above B class if it does not conform to style guideline. A Featured Article is the highest possible assessment, and requires a community consensus demonstrated at Featured Article Candidates per the guidelines of What Is a Featured Article?

Frequently asked questions

 * How can I get an article rated? : First, make sure that the article is actually within the scope of the project (see below). If it is, you can list it in the requesting an assessment section below.
 * Who can assess articles? : Anyone is free to add—or change—the rating of an article, but please follow the guidelines.
 * Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? : Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. If you have particular questions, you might ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
 * Where can I get more comments about an article? : Contact WikiProject Medicine who will handle it or assign the issue to someone. You may also list it for a Peer review.
 * What if I don't agree with a rating? : Relist it as a request or contact the project.
 * Aren't the ratings subjective? : Yes, they are (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), but it's the best system we've been able to devise; if you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask on the discussion page for this department, or to contact the WikiProject Medicine directly.

Is WPMED the correct WikiProject to support this article?
This project supports articles related to medicine, such as diseases, conditions, and treatments for humans. However, there are many areas of medicine that it does not support, including veterinary medicine and alternative medicine. Additionally, there are other projects that are more closely related to some articles. Here are some other projects that may be better matches for some topics:


 * Probably no
 * People that happen to have a medical condition.
 * Human anatomy: Tag with . Additionally, tag with  only for anatomy articles with prominent clinical content. Other tags may also be appropriate.
 * Physiology: Tag with . Additionally, tag with  only for physiology articles with prominent clinical content.  Other tags may also be appropriate.
 * Neuroanatomy and Neurophysiology. Tag neuroanatomy articles with, neurophysiology articles with and lab work, non-human neurology, and ideas about how nerves work with . Only tag WPMED with neurology task force for clinical practice, symptoms, tests and diseases.
 * Alternative medicine: Generally, tag with  instead of WPMED.  Major articles may be supported by both projects.
 * Non-human medicine and microbes that do not cause diseases in humans: Use  or  instead of WPMED.
 * Cell signaling and involved molecules:, unless there is significant medical information in the article.
 * Science in general or the scientific method: Use  instead of WPMED unless the connection to medicine is clearly obvious to the reader.
 * Sex toys and other objects that could transmit diseases, result in injuries, or otherwise have some tangential connection to medicine.
 * Pharmaceutical companies: Tag all of these with .  (Medical device manufacturers are still within WPMED, with importance set to "Low".)
 * Hospitals and other medical facilities where healthcare is undertaken: Use instead of WPMED.
 * Medical schools: Use


 * Use judgment
 * Health and fitness: Tag all with . Add WPMED only if the article includes a significant medical component.
 * Dentistry: Tag all with .  For articles generalizable to all of medicine, also use WPMED.
 * Nursing: Tag all with .  Add WPMED for articles demonstrating its interaction with medicine.
 * Physicians or other healthcare workers: .  Add WPMED only if the person is notable for substantial contributions to medicine, set , and add    Use PetScan to check for incorrect priority ratings.
 * Microbes, pathogens, and infectious diseases: Infectious diseases should be tagged with WPMED.  Organisms should be tagged with  and, if applicable,  or  instead of WPMED.  Exceptions include pathogens that cause various illnesses that do not have their own disease names and infections that are treated medically to prevent progression to disease.
 * Genetics: Tag terminology, general concepts, and lab techniques with  and/or .  For genetic disorders, add WPMED with medical genetics task force.  Add  if it has a significant evolutionary component.
 * Research facilities and laboratories: Add WPMED only if the facility conducts research significant to medicine, and set.


 * Yes
 * Medications: Tag all of these, except those that have never been used clinically, with both  and . Add  if the medication is a recreational or psychoactive drug.
 * Medical conditions, diseases, and syndromes. Use class and importance with judgement.
 * Medical devices
 * Medical procedures: diagnostic, therapeutic, surgical, etc.
 * History of medicine: history of medical conditions, influential leaders, etc.
 * Academic journals that are medicine related: Tag all these with and WPMED

Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the parameters in the WPMED project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed medicine articles (empty as of June 2011).

Syntax
You can learn the syntax by looking at the talk pages in edit mode and by reading the info below. This is the rating syntax (ratings are samples, change to what applies to the article in question):


 * Displays the default banner, showing the project info and only ??? for the quality and importance parameters.


 * Classed A with Top priority. All assessed articles should have quality and importance filled in.

Quality assessment
An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the WPMED project banner on its talk page:

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article:


 * FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class medicine articles)
 * A (adds articles to Category:A-Class medicine articles)
 * GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class medicine articles)
 * B (adds articles to Category:B-Class medicine articles)
 * C (adds articles to Category:C-Class medicine articles)
 * Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class medicine articles)
 * Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class medicine articles)
 * FL (adds articles to Category:FL-Class medicine articles)
 * List (adds articles to Category:List-Class medicine articles)
 * Category (adds categories to Category:Category-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)
 * Dab (adds articles to Category:Disambig-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)
 * FM (adds articles to Category:FM-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)
 * File (adds articles to Category:File-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)
 * Portal (adds articles to Category:Portal-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)
 * Project (adds articles to Category:Project-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)
 * Redirect (adds articles to Category:Redirect-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)
 * Template (adds templates to Category:Template-Class medicine articles and automatically sets importance=NA)

Priority assessment
An article's priority assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the WPMED project banner on its talk page:



The following values may be used for the importance parameter:


 * Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance medicine articles)
 * High (adds articles to Category:High-importance medicine articles)
 * Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance medicine articles)
 * Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance medicine articles)
 * NA (for pages, such as categories, templates, and disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-importance medicine articles). This means "non-article", NOT non-applicable.

Task force parameters
If an article is within the scope of a task force, use the code below, replacing taskforce with the name of the desired task force:



The following parameters may be used for the taskforce variable, with the value always being Yes: For task forces that use their own priority assessment, the taskforce-imp parameter should be used, replacing "taskforce" in taskforce-imp with one of the above values. Acceptable values for the taskforce-imp parameters are the same as for the importance parameter, listed above in.
 * anaesthesiology (adds articles to the Anaesthesiology task force categories)
 * cardiology (adds articles to the Cardiology task force categories)
 * dermatology (adds articles to the Dermatology task force categories)
 * emergency (adds articles to the Emergency medicine and EMS task force categories)
 * gastroenterology (adds articles to the Gastroenterology task force categories)
 * genetics (adds articles to the Medical genetics task force categories)
 * hemonc (adds articles to the Hematology-oncology task force categories)
 * nephrology (adds articles to the Nephrology task force categories)
 * neurology (adds articles to the Neurology task force categories)
 * ophthalmology (adds articles to the Ophthalmology task force categories)
 * pathology (adds articles to the Pathology task force categories)
 * psychiatry (adds articles to the Psychiatry task force categories)
 * pulmonology (adds articles to the Pulmonology task force categories)
 * radiology (adds articles to the Radiology task force categories)
 * reproductive (adds articles to the Reproductive medicine task force categories)
 * society (adds articles to the Society and medicine task force categories)
 * toxicology (adds articles to the Toxicology task force categories)

If a taskforce is indicated, but a taskforce-imp is not given, some taskforces will use the WPMED importance, whereas others will rank it as unassessed importance for the taskforce.

Importance scale
The purpose of the importance rating is to direct the project's article improvement efforts towards the most important articles, and incidentally to provide a convenient shortlist of important topics for readers who are interested in medicine generally.

All diseases, conditions, medications, and tests are of "top" importance to people who are directly affected by them. The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability that the average reader of Wikipedia will look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics that are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to a student, expert or patient.

WPMED's specific guidelines for importance ratings are provided below. In making an assessment, it is often helpful to compare the article with others that already have the proposed rating. Links to each category are provided in the first column of this table:

Requesting an assessment or re-assessment

 * What you can accomplish here
 * This process is to find out whether your article is currently assessed at the correct level (Stub, Start, C, B) and correct importance (Low, Mid, High, Top). If you have significantly expanded an article and it is rated below B class, or if you feel the rating is otherwise incorrect, then please feel free to list it below.


 * What you can NOT accomplish here
 * If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, contact the volunteers at WT:MED or list it at Peer review instead.
 * If you think the article is particularly well written, then you can nominate it as a possible Good article or even as a possible Featured article.
 * We do not currently have a process for identifying A-class articles.
 * Add articles here! Newest requests on the BOTTOM

List

 * Uterine prolapse - Currently an S-class article of mid-importance. I updated it significantly over the last month. I added several new sections to follow the manual of style: signs and symptoms, diagnosis and management, outcomes, epidemiology, and history. I also expanded on existing sections, edited the lead, updated references where they could be updated with secondary sources from within the last 5ish years, and added several images. --PPatel224 (talk) 14:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ B class. Thank you for your work on this article, @PPatel224. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:04, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Renal hypoplasia - Currently rated Stub-class, but it has been expanded a bit. Thanks, AxiumWiki (talk) 07:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Laryngitis - Rated Start-class since 2008. It needs a reassessment. Thanks, AxiumWiki (talk) 01:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Irritation fibroma - Currently unassessed. Thanks, AxiumWiki (talk) 05:42, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @AxiumWiki, I have quickly assessed all three for you. You are allowed to assess articles on your own, too. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I’m not confident enough to rate articles on my own and I prefer someone else to do it. AxiumWiki (talk) 06:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for improving these articles.   WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)