Talk:Tularemia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alidergham.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Suggested Changes

Hi Everyone. We are a group of medical students editing this Wikipedia page as part of an assignment. We made a list of our suggestions for the tularemia article. We would really appreciate any feedback/guidance on these points.

1.Overview:

In the overview second paragraph, when describing animal reservoirs and modes of transmission keep the same text but add some more current reviews. When explaining how the disease is spread in the same paragraph add: "Other ways in which humans can contract the disease include direct contact with infected animals and exposure to contaminated soil or water."

• one reference is generally enough, as long as it supports the text(statement)Wikipedia:Citing_sources--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
• Thanks for this suggestion! We selected the most relevant reference.AlisonM1991 (talk) 20:48, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

2.Signs & Symptoms/Clinical Presentation:

Reorder this section with classic signs & symptoms listed first, followed by clinical subtypes and then mortality. Mortality statement in this section is unsupported, therefore change phrase to “The rate of mortality (death) associated with tularemia has decreased from 60% to less than 4% since the invention of antibiotics."

• in terms of 'mortality' you may want to establish a Prognosis section(after 'Treatment')Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles to insert that text...IMO--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes a section on prognosis is a good idea. Both prognosis with treatment and without treatment if you can find sources to support it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:42, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Added - thanks!AlisonM1991 (talk) 15:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

3. Pathology:

Insert the following sentences into the Pathology section: "Cultures are also completed to determine the specific strain of Francisella Tularensis bacteria.  This is important because different strains (holarctica, mediatica, novicida) are susceptible to different types of antibiotics." Insert the following sentences to clarify methods of diagnosis: "There are two forms, agglutination based tests (tube based and microagglutination) and serum based tests. A titer of 1:160 and 1:128 respectively confirms diagnosis in agglutination based tests. For serum based tests, diagnosis is confirmed when there is at least a four-fold increase in serum antibodies assessed two weeks apart."

Sure Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:55, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

4.Cause:

Change the first sentence of the cause section to read: “Francisella tularensis is a facultative intracellular bacterium; meaning, it can survive outside of a host or within cells." This change will improve the accuracy of the statement and avoid confusion stemming from the word “parasite”.

How about putting the english first and latin / greek second?

"Francisella tularensis can live both within and outside the cells of the animal it infections, meaning it is a facultative intracellular bacterium. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:52, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

5.Prevention/Treatment:

Update information on vaccinations to read: "Currently, there are no safe, available, government approved vaccines against tularemia. However, vaccination research and development continues, with live attenuated vaccines being the most thoroughly researched and most likely candidate for approval. Sub-unit vaccine candidates, such as killed-whole cell vaccines, are also under investigation, however research has not reached a state of public use."

Update information on optimal preventative practices and remove information regarding fluoroquinolone use as a possible treatment to read: “Currently, optimal preventative practices include limiting direct exposure when handling potentially infected animals, such as wearing gloves and face masks while handling potentially infected animals (importantly when skinning deceased animals). If infection occurs or is suspected, current best treatment practices include administration of streptomycin and/or gentamicin antibiotics.”

• a)yes this does seem like a good improvement to this section( added {{Reflist} at bottom for clarity)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

• b)redid reference[1], Tularemia vaccines.Putzova D1, Senitkova I1, Stulik J2. please use <ref name="blank">[2] thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 00:12, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
• Thanks! We believe we have appropriately fixed the reference.AlisonM1991 (talk) 20:48, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

6. Epidemiology:

Remove the introductory sentence: "The disease is endemic in North America and parts of Europe and Asia", as it is not cited and gives contradictory information. We'd like to replace the previous sentence with: "Tularemia is most prevalent in the Northern Hemisphere (between 30º and 71º north latitude)."

How about "Tularemia is most common in the Northern Hemisphere, including North America and parts of Europe and Asia It occurs between 30º and 71º north latitude."

A little easier to understand IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:47, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for your help! AlisonM1991 (talk) 17:23, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

• in terms of points 3, 4 and 6 they seem logical and objective I would therefore agree w/ each one--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

COMMENT: Small stuff - As of 11/8 your refs 7 & 8 are identical and both are not formatted correctly (hence the red). [Since fixed.] The WHO citation is not in proper format. Do you have content to create a Prognosis section, to be before the History section? David notMD (talk) 22:08, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you for your comments! We believe we have fixed the WHO citation. We should enough content to add a “Prognosis” section, where we can add information from more recent references and reallocate material from other sections (ie. the details about mortality). If this is within the scope of this project, we would be happy to add this section.AlisonM1991 (talk) 20:48, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

BE BOLD in your edits. So yes, feel free to move existing text to create Prognosis. David notMD (talk) 00:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tularemia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090309172516/http://fhp.osd.mil/CBexposures/pdfs/red_cloud.pdf to http://fhp.osd.mil/CBexposures/pdfs/red_cloud.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Who is Ohara?

This is also called "Ohara's fever" (which redirects here). Who is Ohara? Sounds like a Japanese name. Equinox ◑ 23:04, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

The ancient section relies on a weak source, should it be removed?

The ancient section is based on an article in Medical Hypotheses, a journal of speculative theories, that is not peer-reviewed. It is also not really a history journal. I don't see anyone citing the article nor do I see other sources. If no one can find other sources, I think we should consider removing it. Thanks. -- Chris vLS (talk) 06:37, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

The prevention section of the article is lacking

There was and still is an approved vaccine in Soviet Union and post-soviet states: historically it was administered to millions, and in RF you can still apply for a vaccination and even buy the vaccine (proof, though the page is in russian). The same works for at least some of former USSR states. More on existing tularemia vaccines can be found on Science Direct. 91.103.248.8 (talk) 19:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)