→Reply quotebox with inserted reviewer decisions and feedback 04-APR-2018: Fixing style/layout errors |
|||
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{clear}} |
{{clear}} |
||
:[[User:Spintendo]] thanks for replying, but your response here was off. |
|||
:The 2nd note about page numbers is not really relevant -- we dont need them for journal articles (for books, yes), but not for journal articles. |
|||
:The real issue here are the sources. The first ref is PMID 20646854, the second is PMID 24997723, and the third is PMID 25129613. All three of these refs fail [[WP:MEDRS]] in that they are primary sources. Both Spintendo and Ekimyenoom, please review [[WP:MEDRS]] and especially [[WP:MEDDEF]]. These are "primary sources" in that they are papers describing clinical trials. What MEDRS says, is that content about health needs to be sourced to "secondary sources", which are [[literature review]]s in good quality journals in the biomedical literature, or statements by major medical or scientific bodies (the NIH, the NHS in the UK, the FDA or EMA, NICE in the UK, guidelines by mainstream medical associations, and the like). The content is not OK because the sources cited are not reliable per MEDRS. |
|||
:Further the content is really marketing the medical device, with some citations thrown behind it. Using Wikipedia for promotion is not OK, per the policy, [[WP:PROMO]]. What we do is ''summarize'' what reliable sources say and we look at what several MEDRS refs say, and give emphasis as they do. |
|||
:This is a hard thing to learn how to do, and more difficult when a person's job is to market something. But this is Wikipedia, and this is how we work here. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 17:16, 4 April 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:16, 4 April 2018
Medicine GA‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Brachytherapy has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
|
Methods of Breast Brachytherapy
@Jytdog Hi Jytdog. I noticed you recently removed a portion of one of my edits for lacking sources. I've since re-added it with sources added. If what's written now is still inadequate, could you reply to me here so I have an opportunity to address the concerns? When I get around to it, I'll likely attempt the same for NIBB as well (i.e. re-add with appropriate refs). If I could make the same request there I'd appreciate it.
Cheers,
J.michael7 (talk) 00:20, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Request edit on 3 April 2018
{{request edit}} has been deprecated. Please change this template call to one of the following:
- For edit requests relating to a conflict of interest, please use {{edit COI}}.
- If you are partially-blocked from editing the page, please use {{edit partially-blocked}}.
- If the page is protected, use one of the following:
If you simply need to ask for help in making an edit, please change the template to {{help me}}.
Non-Invasive Breast Brachytherapy Non-Invasive Breast Brachytherapy (NIBB) has the advantage of delivering radiation to the tumor bed without needing an invasive device. This is accomplished by employing external applicators with breast immobilization and mammographic image guidance for each radiation treatment fraction. The complications of managing an indwelling catheter or catheters are eliminated, as are the risks of instrumentation-related infection. Also, oncoplastic reconstruction to enhance the cosmetic outcomes of surgery can be performed with NIBB as long as the tissues at risk are appropriated marked. The dose to healthy tissues (heart, lungs, skin, and chest wall) is minimized through the use of shielded applicators which position and direct the radiation field([1]). Non-Invasive Breast Brachytherapy currently being used for APBI([2]) and the "boost” portion([3]) of EBRT.
This edit belongs under the breast cancer brachytherapy section.
Ekimyenoom (talk) 15:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ Sioshansi, S; Rivard, M; Hiatt, J; Hurley, A; Lee, Y; Wazer, D (2011). "Dose modeling of noninvasive image-guided breast brachytherapy in comparison to electron beam boost and three-dimensional conformal accelerated breast irradiation". Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 80 (2): 410-416.
- ^ Hepel, JT; Hiatt, JR; Sha, S; Leonard, KL; Graves, TA; Wiggins, DL; Mastras, D; Pittier, A; Wazer, DE (2014). "The rationale, technique, and feasibility of partial breast irradiation using noninvasive image-guided breast brachytherapy". Brachytherapy. 13: 493-501.
- ^ Hepel, JT; Leonard, KL; Hiatt, JR; DiPetrillo, TA; Wazer, DE (2014). "Factors influencing eligibility for breast boost using noninvasive image-guided breast brachytherapy". Brachytherapy. 13: 579-583.
Reply quotebox with inserted reviewer decisions and feedback 04-APR-2018
Below you will see where text from your request has been quoted with individual advisory messages placed underneath, either accepting, declining or otherwise commenting upon your proposal(s). Please see the enclosed notes for additional information about each request. Also note areas where additional clarification was required. When this clarification is ready to be provided to the reviewer, please change the edit request template to read from ans=yes to ans=no. Spintendo 16:45, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Non-Invasive Breast Brachytherapy Non-Invasive Breast Brachytherapy (NIBB) has the advantage of delivering radiation to the tumor bed without needing an invasive device. This is accomplished by employing external applicators with breast immobilization and mammographic image guidance for each radiation treatment fraction. The complications of managing an indwelling catheter or catheters are eliminated, as are the risks of instrumentation-related infection. Also, oncoplastic reconstruction to enhance the cosmetic outcomes of surgery can be performed with NIBB as long as the tissues at risk are appropriated marked.
Not approved.[note 1]
___________
The dose to healthy tissues (heart, lungs, skin, and chest wall) is minimized through the use of shielded applicators which position and direct the radiation field([1]). Non-Invasive Breast Brachytherapy currently being used for APBI([2]) and the "boost” portion([3]) of EBRT.
Clarification needed.[note 2]
___________
- User:Spintendo thanks for replying, but your response here was off.
- The 2nd note about page numbers is not really relevant -- we dont need them for journal articles (for books, yes), but not for journal articles.
- The real issue here are the sources. The first ref is PMID 20646854, the second is PMID 24997723, and the third is PMID 25129613. All three of these refs fail WP:MEDRS in that they are primary sources. Both Spintendo and Ekimyenoom, please review WP:MEDRS and especially WP:MEDDEF. These are "primary sources" in that they are papers describing clinical trials. What MEDRS says, is that content about health needs to be sourced to "secondary sources", which are literature reviews in good quality journals in the biomedical literature, or statements by major medical or scientific bodies (the NIH, the NHS in the UK, the FDA or EMA, NICE in the UK, guidelines by mainstream medical associations, and the like). The content is not OK because the sources cited are not reliable per MEDRS.
- Further the content is really marketing the medical device, with some citations thrown behind it. Using Wikipedia for promotion is not OK, per the policy, WP:PROMO. What we do is summarize what reliable sources say and we look at what several MEDRS refs say, and give emphasis as they do.
- This is a hard thing to learn how to do, and more difficult when a person's job is to market something. But this is Wikipedia, and this is how we work here. Jytdog (talk) 17:16, 4 April 2018 (UTC)