Talk:2015 Group Project 5: Difference between revisions
| Line 155: | Line 155: | ||
Very well researched topic, with all key points being addressed. Condensing all of your research and being a little more selective about what you include will be the key to a great final page. | Very well researched topic, with all key points being addressed. Condensing all of your research and being a little more selective about what you include will be the key to a great final page. | ||
===4=== | |||
The wikipage looks like it’s progressing very well, especially with the amount of content and references I can safely say you guys have worked hard on it and have done a substantial amount of research so well done guys. I liked the flow chart that you guys inserted, it really simplified the understanding of the IVF procedure as opposed to reading lengthy text. I also particularly liked the collapsible timeline which was presented very nicely and summarised the progress of oncofertility over time very well. | |||
As for improvements, the references definitely need to be fixed up. There were multiple appearances of the same reference and some of the links also did not work such as reference 24 and 25. On top of that the referencing for the websites were not in a consistent format and some were also done incorrectly so be sure to fix that up. I would also look out for the type of sources used such as webmd and medianews today. I’m not entirely sure if they are reliable or acceptable but I suggest you consult Mark about that. | |||
Additionally, the use of tables is a very good way of presenting information however, for the tables under the topic of fertility preservation for both men and women I initially though that each of the columns was a comparison against each other. Only later did I realise that each of the columns contained an individual list of treatments. To minimise the confusion I suggest rearranging the table and labelling row 1 as ‘Before treatment’, then row 2 as ‘During treatment’ and finally row 3 as ‘After treatment’ then collectively placing the treatments in their rightful spaces in the following column. | |||
A glossary is also missing from this page, having the definitions of the more difficult terms would assist with understanding the topic. Also on another note in the ‘Types of Chemotherapy drugs’ section, I think it would look more aesthetically pleasing if bullet points were used rather than the dashes. | |||
Overall, there is a substantial amount of content, and great use of images, videos and tables. Keep up the good work! | |||
---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 21:22, 14 October 2015
2015 Projects: Three Person Embryos | Ovarian Hyper-stimulation Syndrome | Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome | Male Infertility | Oncofertility | Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis | Students
Links to Project Discussion Pages: Discussion 1 | Discussion 2 | Discussion 3 | Discussion 4 | Discussion 5 | Discussion 6
This is the discussion page for your project.
- Use this page to discuss online the project with your group members.
- Paste useful resources here.
- Remember to use your signature button to identify who you are when adding content here.
- The following collapsed tables provide starting points for students during project work, you also have tutorials built into practical classes and practice exercises for individual assessmet items.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey guys - i tried to upload a video for the how cancer cells work section - but i have no idea how to do it, tried looking it up but have failed immensely! so i you know how to do it - please explain haha so grateful! thanks --Z5015534 (talk) 12:42, 4 October 2015 (AEDT)
--Mark Hill (talk) 11:23, 25 September 2015 (AEST) OK, there is so much more that should be on your project page by now. That currently consists of all text, no media, histology, graphics, tables etc. Furthermore no discussion of animal models used in research for this topic. This project page is not ready for peer review.
Hi everyone, the page is coming together well. only thing is while we write up our parts can we focus on all using in text referencing so that we are consistent and can just have a single reference list at the bottom. I found out how to use the same reference again and only have it associated with one in text number, so if you are using the same reference and would like me to show you how to do this let me know :) --Z3463667 (talk) 21:40, 14 September 2015 (AEST)
I have added some of the references + citations but not yet finished as this is only the draft and I might delete some of the parts so there is no point adding the citations/ text referencing now. I will add my part at the end. I'm still waiting for your part to see what to do. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15951668 --Z3463890 (talk) 08:35, 17 September 2015 (AEST)
Research/Review articles
[Oncofertility and breast cancer: Where have we come from, where are we going?].
<pubmed>25991386</pubmed>
This article focuses on the current context of national and international recommendations, techniques development to evaluate and preserve fertility and patients' claims, this study aims to make a survey about the management of patients' breast cancer regarding oncofertility. This article concludes that , in order to satisfy patients' requests, several improvements have to be made regarding the patients' information, the health professionals' awareness and care coordination.I don't go through it now but very interesting article to read and useful for our group project.
Emergency fertility preservation for female patients with cancer: clinical perspectives.
<pubmed>26026071</pubmed>
This article explains about clinical perspectives to explore the new as well as the currently available options and strategies that can be used for emergency fertility preservation of female cancer patients.Such options include emergency ovarian stimulation, embryo freezing, egg freezing, ovarian tissue freezing and autotransplantation, in vitro maturation, and ovarian protection techniques. This article also mentions the advantages and disadvantages of each option as well as a new comprehensive multi-step strategy for these situations.
Sexual dysfunction and infertility as late effects of cancer treatment
<pubmed>26217165</pubmed>
As all we know, Sexual dysfunction is the main consequence of cancer treatment. Problems are usually linked to damage to nerves, blood vessels, and hormones that underlie normal sexual function. This article emphasizes on these sexual dysfunction and does in depth. It addresses that innovations in cancer treatment such as robotic surgery or more targeted radiation therapy have not had the anticipated result of reducing sexual dysfunction. Therefore, advances in both technologies and in knowledge about how cancer treatments can damage fertility, offer hope to patients who want children.
Impact of fertility preservation counseling and treatment on psychological outcomes among women with cancer: A systematic review
<pubmed>26264701</pubmed>
This article explains about psychological outcomes in female cancer patients who undergo fertility preservation counseling/consultation (FPC), with or without fertility preservation (FP).I read through the whole article as I found it really interesting and relevant to our group project. This is another subheadings we can add to those.
--Z3463890 (talk) 11:24, 24 August 2015 (AEST)
I DID THE SAME :)
Variability in the practice of fertility preservation for patients with cancer.
<pubmed>26010087</pubmed> This is an interesting article on how reproductive endocrinologists counselled cancer patients on fertility preservation. This is relevant to our group projects because it gives us an idea of what techniques and services are currently being utilised to help women.
Strategies for fertility preservation in young patients with cancer: a comprehensive approach.
<pubmed>24669162</pubmed> This article recognises that as cancer treatment improves the life span of patients, with it comes the treat to fertility. It is a great article as it clearly states what methods are currently available for addressing fertility preservation in males and females.
Clinical guide to fertility preservation in hematopoietic cell transplant recipients.
<pubmed>24419521</pubmed> This article focuses specifically on patients suffering infertility due to hematopoietic cell transplantation. It lists the options available to the patients whether female or male, which are applicable to patients who underwent other treatments and also lists the barriers to fertility preservation.
Fertility preservation in patients with haematological disorders: a retrospective cohort study.
<pubmed>24140311</pubmed> This article addresses fertility treatment in patients with haematological disorders specifically. However, is it a really good article as it is a cohort study comparing patients at various stages in their cancer journey, such as those who have had prior chemotherapy, those who pursued ovarian stimulation and those who did not pursue fertility treatment at all.
just moving my articles here for reference while i edit the project page. --Z3463667 (talk) 11:39, 14 September 2015 (AEST)
Hi I have added some points to the page but i will add more info soon. In terms of references and accurate citation, I have written down all the references and I will add those at the end as I might edit/delete some of them. I will explain those fertility drugs too. just added the names and do them over weekend.
--Z3463890 (talk) 08:58, 11 September 2015 (AEST)
Hi everyone,
yes, I agree we have to assign everyone a certain section to write about, I'm happy to do Infertility causing cancers ( I already found those related articles from pubmed) and Oncofertility timeline. so if everyone is happy I can start it :)
--Z3463890 (talk) 08:05, 27 August 2015 (AEST)
Hi People,
Does anyone know how to reference a non pubmed source? I'm not sure how to reference the general information that we want to put on our page? I definitely think also that we should assign everyone a certain section to cover - so that were not all just editing and adding stuff in chaos - Ive started editing the chemotherapy section of the page - i hope this is alright if i take that on- i found some good info! dont worry the stuff i have up now is no where near finished.. just having a play around with general stuff and trying to get the hang of editing etc... (literally no nothing about IT...) But at the end it obviously will be all sorted and good :)
Thanks
--Z5015534 (talk) 16:18, 26 August 2015 (AEST)
Hey everyone,
As discussed we will be researching oncofertility as our topic for this week, and depending on how successful our research is we will decide on whether we stick to the topic or not. I have added some potential subheadings to help guide our research, feel free to change them and add more. We need to pick a subheading each and find research articles related to it for this weeks individual lab assessment. https://oncofertility.northwestern.edu/patients/fertility-preservation-options-nu --> this is a good website to trigger ideas to research. --Z3463667 (talk) 17:12, 23 August 2015 (AEST)
Peer Review=
1
Let me start off by commending this group on a fantastic page! It is incredibly thorough, detailed and long. You can immediately see that a lot of work and research has gone into it. You have a great list of references and they appear to be cited correctly throughout the page. However, some sections which appear to be incomplete and lack some citations e.g. “fertility preservation”.
One suggestion I will make, is it would be good to see the addition of some hand-drawn images, perhaps one under either of the first 3 headings. Some more images could be used under the heading “surgery”. The videos used on this page are great. Really informative, relevant and easy to watch. I also think the “what are cancer cells” section should be higher up on the page as it is part of the basis of what the whole page is about. It also cuts between the two sections “chemotherapy” and “how does chemotherapy work?” which should be one after another. On the topic of formatting, you have a heading in there called “oncofertility timeline”, I think it would be better placed at the beginning of the page where it is more relevant.
I also think there is just too much text in some areas e.g. “Fertility preservation in women” and “surgery”. It makes that part of the page look clustered and difficult to read. Perhaps simplifying it more into bullet points, as you have done in other areas of the page, would be good. Conversely though, I think areas such as “targeted drugs” and “bone marrow or stem cells transplant” could use more work, however, it is possible you still intend to work on those areas anyway.
I would suggest adding a glossary to the bottom of your page to assist in those who view your page with a lower level of scientific knowledge. You have covered an expansive range of topics pertaining to your topic, all of which are relevant and link well with each other. The page has a great focus on the learning aims of embryology. I think with some formatting corrections and some simplification of the text, this will be a really wonderful page.
Awesome page so far guys! I commend you on your use of various videos to assist in conveying your ideas. Furthermore, the images you have chosen are highly relevant to the topic of discussion and assist the reader in gaining a greater understanding of oncofertility. All copyright information is present for the images you have used which is excellent to see. It may be worth including a hand drawn image under the 'radiation' subheading, as we are required to include at least one such image. The current image under the radiation subheading could easily be replicated by hand and could fulfill this portion of the criteria.
I am nitpicking here, but I would also recommend including some kind of media, most likely a picture, underneath the surgery subheading. It might even be worth doing the hand drawn image here if possible. A picture may also be good underneath the 'types of chemotherapy drugs' subheading, just to break up the wall of text and improve the reading experience for the reader. It might also be worth restructuring the 'oncofertility limitations' subheading into the form of a table (if possible), as the bullet point format feels quite awkward and out of place compared to the rest of the page. The inclusion of a glossary is also recommended, as this page will be accessible by the general public and a glossary will assist those without a background in embryology to understand and appreciate your content.
Keep up the great work guys! Your page is absolutely amazing so far and the effort you have put in is definitely reflected in the high quality of your page.
3
COMMENDATIONS
• The short video was a good visual aid that helped me understand your topic.
• The use of tables and a few images were good additions to your page.
• Good referencing throughout.
• Your “Oncofertility Timeline” was great; straight to the point and well organised. Maybe place it at the beginning of your page as a part of your introduction?
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Make sure your proofread your work; I saw a few very long sentences that could be broken up into smaller sentences. This will make your page easier to read and understand.
• Furthermore, some words are capitalised that don’t need to be; e.g. “Oncofertility” in your introduction and “Chemotherapy” in the Infertility section.
• Your page would benefit from the use of subheadings. There are large chunks of information under your headings, making it a bit difficult to follow at times (particularly in your Radiation section).
• I recommend reading through your information and removing details that may be excessive. By making your information more concise, your page will flow better and will encourage the audience to keep reading. Some of the information is a bit repetitive across your sections.
• I liked the use of a table in “Fertility Preservation in Men,” however, I feel as though you could add more details to it. I found the concepts presented in this table difficult to understand; maybe link it a bit better to the information below? Or just organise all of the information into a table?
Very well researched topic, with all key points being addressed. Condensing all of your research and being a little more selective about what you include will be the key to a great final page.
4
The wikipage looks like it’s progressing very well, especially with the amount of content and references I can safely say you guys have worked hard on it and have done a substantial amount of research so well done guys. I liked the flow chart that you guys inserted, it really simplified the understanding of the IVF procedure as opposed to reading lengthy text. I also particularly liked the collapsible timeline which was presented very nicely and summarised the progress of oncofertility over time very well.
As for improvements, the references definitely need to be fixed up. There were multiple appearances of the same reference and some of the links also did not work such as reference 24 and 25. On top of that the referencing for the websites were not in a consistent format and some were also done incorrectly so be sure to fix that up. I would also look out for the type of sources used such as webmd and medianews today. I’m not entirely sure if they are reliable or acceptable but I suggest you consult Mark about that.
Additionally, the use of tables is a very good way of presenting information however, for the tables under the topic of fertility preservation for both men and women I initially though that each of the columns was a comparison against each other. Only later did I realise that each of the columns contained an individual list of treatments. To minimise the confusion I suggest rearranging the table and labelling row 1 as ‘Before treatment’, then row 2 as ‘During treatment’ and finally row 3 as ‘After treatment’ then collectively placing the treatments in their rightful spaces in the following column.
A glossary is also missing from this page, having the definitions of the more difficult terms would assist with understanding the topic. Also on another note in the ‘Types of Chemotherapy drugs’ section, I think it would look more aesthetically pleasing if bullet points were used rather than the dashes.
Overall, there is a substantial amount of content, and great use of images, videos and tables. Keep up the good work!
