Talk:Gastroenterology

Expansion needed

Needs major expanding. Most appendicitis cases are managed by the surgeons anyway. Jfdwolff 12:40, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Navigation box

I've started Mediawiki:Gastroenterology, a box to go under all clinical gastroenterology articles. This is still incomplete (an example is below), so please expand this as widely as reasonable. JFW | T@lk 23:11, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

History

Countincr (talk · contribs) has kindly added some nice, if with some mistakes, historical notes. I had never heard of Schindler. Working on his biography now. Another useful list can be found here. For example, ERCP belongs on the list. JFW | T@lk 16:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

PMID 16865585 uses quantitative historometry to show that the Nazis managed to destroy the very fertile field of gastroenterology in their country, and a shift of emphasis to the USA. JFW | T@lk 19:52, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Flatus

Needs a new more anatomically correct term that reflects the gases being passed through the rectum and anus. Flatus is a Latin derivation that is 350 years old. I propose it be replaced with a word with Greek roots. Why Greek language? It's only the oldest surviving language that is 3500 years-old. Would Proctoaerio male with gas, Proctoaeria, female with gas and Proctoaerius gender Neutral, not be better? Drbeana wartfry (talk) 01:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: 2022-23 WikiMed Directed Studies

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 November 2022 and 17 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hypnotoad2022 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Minhle90.

— Assignment last updated by Ewingdo 05:11, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review for @Hypnotoad2022

Lead

Guiding questions:

• The lead section has been updated with additional information and few more references. You did a good job of having general information about gastroenterology. There is a picture of the GI tract but it is without the esophagus and mouth. May be you can update with a new picture for a more comprehensive information. Additionally, an addition of the organizations which do credentials for GI physicians in U.S or leading GI research facilities may be good ones. Overall, the current lead is concise and provide description of the body info.

Content

Guiding questions:

• I see that you added some new contents with new references. All of the new references are fairly new as most of them are in 2022. I like how you rewrote the lead section to make it more concise with additional information. In addition, you added a new section of "As a medical profession" with new sub-sections to explain training types of a GI physician. For the "education and training", you include the organizations which credential GI trainings in America. One way to improve this section is explaining how each organization plays its part in the GI field. For examples, how is the ACG different from the AGA and ASGE? Is one more important than the others? If a physician seeks GI training in America, what criteria are required for the fellowship? Are they allowed to practice in multiple states or they needs different licensure for each state? Additional references are needed to answer these questions. For the "scope of practice", you did a good job of listing the procedures that is done by a GI physician. I would suggest a brief explanation of each procedures with references instead of just listing. The "subspecialties" gives more insight into even more specialized track in the GI field. However, you should include more references into this section. For example, when you talk about hepatology as a specialist for liver diseases, there were no references. A more detailed explanation of each sub-specialty is a good addition. For example, you can include the scope of practice of transplant hepatologist and what procedures they do most and with references. I see that you had a good explanation of advanced endoscopy but there were no references for this
• Further down of the article, I can see multiple opportunities for improvement. For the "Journal", there is currently a list of GI journals. You can expand on this by including the topics covered in each journal and some of the recent popular topics. For the "Gastroenterologist", you can expand on the important works of the ones included in this article. There are numerous gastroenterologists out there, and explanations of their important works can justify why they are used as noticeable GI physicians. It is the same for "research resources". A description of what topics covered in these journals/GI websites and current popular research topics are needed with references. For the "Disease Classification", the ICD needs to be updated with new one and expansion of this section is required. The current information is very scattered with random information. You can rewrite this section to make it more concise and comprehensive.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• The contents so far seem neutral to me as it provides an unbiased explanations about the GI field. However, additional information and contents are needed to further explain the new sections which you created, such as the "subspecialties". may be you can focus on one section at a time for expansion. In addition, the current article has no biased, overrepresented, or underrepresented points. It is still in the novel state where additional information is needed to construct a point. Additionally, new references are needed to increase the credibility of the article.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• The sources and references so far are new (2022) and reliable. The hyperlinks of references are also worked. I would suggest you include more references for each new information. For example, there is no reference for hepatology in the "subspecialties". The references will make your information more valid.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• The new contents are well-written, concise, and easy to read. I would suggest expand each section with new information or improve current information. There are many rooms for content improvement in this article, especially in the "journals", "gastroenterologist", "research resources", and "disease classification" sections. You should include a brief explanation of each topic with references instead of listing. This will increase the article's clarity and complete.

Images and Media

• There is currently no new images or medias in this article. I would suggest a better image of the GI tract from the mouth to rectum. A few pictures of common GI diseases such as GERD or hepatitis would be nice additions. In the "gastroenterologist", pictures of the mentioned physicians would make a great addition to the contents

Overall impressions

• Overall, I think you are going in the right direction of improve the Gastroenterology article. You made some nice addition which improve clarity of the GI field and training. I like the "As a medical profession" section as it shows how to become a GI physician in America. There are many rooms for improvement in this page. You should consider addition more informations and references into each section. May be you can work one section at a time. For example, adding descriptions of the GI organizations and their works/duties in the field with references would help clarify their importance. You can also add a brief explanation of each subspecialties and their scope of practices with references in the "subspecialties" section. An expansion in the "gastroenterologists" including who and why they are important would be a nice addition. It is the same for the "journals" section. Instead of listing, you can include what topics each journal focus on and some current hot topics. These are a few suggestions on how to improve the article. Happy editing!!

Minhle90 (talk) 20:55, 11 December 2022 (UTC)