Talk:WikiJournal Preprints/Leprosy

Plagiarism check
The WMF's plagiarism check tool points out that 'violation is likely' with 79.7% confidence. Please see the results here. Some of this is clearly websites that have picked up your Wikipedia page and then copied it - not sure what we can do about that. But I think that some of the information does predate your Wikipedia page.Can I ask you to check this and see it anything needs to be adjusted. Thanks Rwatson1955 (discuss • contribs) 16:34, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Dear, yes I would be happy to check through these. I really appreciate you helping here and catching these early in the process.

Thank you again!JenOttawa (discuss • contribs) 16:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I see that this source has a 90% chance of a violation via your above link. I am not familiar with this website. Do you think that this is copied off Wiki or vice-versa? this
 * I have checked the second highest confidence match (9%) and see that the repeated use of "M. leprae and M. lepromatosis has" is coming up as a violation. I am assuming that this can be left. I have also changed "Norwegian physician Gerhard Armauer Hansen" to Gerhard Armauer, a physician from Norway" as this sentence was also flagged
 * Hi thanks for responding; I strongly suspect that the Wikipedia page has been copied given the respective dates of the two pages and I think, given the CCL under which Wikipedia is published, this is probably OK but I stand to be corrected if any Wikipedians pick this up. The main thing is that we've noted it here for transparency. I continue to pursue reviewers - six invited to date. Thanks again Rwatson1955 (discuss • contribs) 10:16, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. Based on the Who Wrote That tool, the overlapping phrases from that indahnesia site were already on the wiki page in 2004 and 2007 by:
 * Seglea added this on 14 February 2004 12:49
 * WHO Leprosy added this on 21 March 2007 00:14
 * So I think it's case of the other site copying from the early wp article. T.Shafee(Evo&#65120;Evo)talk 09:36, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking a look .JenOttawa (discuss • contribs) 02:18, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Peer review 1

 * Thank you for the excellent suggestions to improve the Wikipedia article. We look forward to considering these in order to improve what is presently shared on Wikipedia and also hope to continue with this publication in the WikiJournal of Medicine. I will address each comment below by number.
 * 1. Thank you for pointing out that the pathogenicity of the disease needs to be highlighted. I have adjusted to lead to read: "Leprosy has a low pathogenicity, and an estimated 95% of people who contract M. leprae do not develop the disease. ". See revision: https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=WikiJournal_Preprints%2FLeprosy&type=revision&diff=2259690&oldid=2259687
 * 2. Thank you for pointing out the importance of overcoming stigma as an important contribution to improving the health of people with Leprosy. I have found a systematic review to support this,, that shares the results of studies looking at social stigma and the family. Regarding an intervention to improve outcomes, I could not find a high-quality secondary source. I did find some new primary research studies including: and . If we can find a secondary source, these may be helpful. In the meantime, I did find a systematic review on interventions to prevent stigma. I did not include interventions in my recent edit, however, in the background section of this review the role of reducing stigma for improving outcomes in people with diseases including leprosy is discussed. A few primary studies on counseling are including in the stigma review. In summary, in response to this very helpful suggestion, I have added a new section to the article called "Outcomes"(as per Wikipedia's Medical Manual of Style (MED:MOS). The outcomes section shares the following:
 * Outcomes
 * Leprosy is curable, however, when left untreated leprosy can cause permanent physical impairments and damage to a person's nerves, skin, eyes, and limbs.[84] Despite leprosy not being very infectious and having a low pathogenicity, there is still significant stigma and prejudice associated with the disease.[85] Due to this stigma, leprosy can effect a person's participation in social activities and may also effect the lives of their family and friends.85 People with leprosy are also at a higher risk for problems with their mental well being.[85] The social stigma may contribute to problems obtaining employment, financial difficulties, and social isolation.[85] Efforts to reduce discrimination and improve the stigma surrounding leprosy may help improve outcomes for people with leprosy.86
 * 3. I have adjusted the sentence on transmission to more clearly share the evidence related to transmission: "Transmission is through the upper respiratory tract" link to edit.
 * 4. Thank you for this suggestion. The diagnosis section presently reads: In countries where people are frequently infected, a person is considered to have leprosy if they one of the following two signs: Skin lesion consistent with leprosy and with definite sensory loss. Positive skin smears." The WHO resource that was summarized to share this information reads "In an endemic country or area, an individual should be regarded as having leprosy if he or she shows ONE of the following cardinal signs" I feel that this is sufficient. I do not see any information in the sources that specifies "suspected exposure" beyond the country or area where the person lives. Do you agree that we can leave as is based on the WHO source? Thank you again for taking such a careful look at the article and for pointing out so many areas for improvement.
 * 5. The reviewer has suggested that we improve the Prevention section to include information for people who live close to someone with leprosy and the BCG vaccine. In response to this, I looked in the literature and added the following sentence to the article: "People living in the same home as a person with leprosy are suggested to take a BCG booster which may improve their immunity by 56%." I have also included two new review articles to support this. Link to my edit.
 * 6. Thank you for the suggestion to include public policy plans and technologies for people living with leprosy. In response to your suggestion, I have added a new section to the article entitled "Public policy" and included information summarized from the "Global Leprosy Strategy 2016–2020: Accelerating towards a leprosy-free world". Link to my edit to the pre-print. Regarding technological advances, I performed a literature search and found numerous primary sources sharing the efficacy of technological advances such as apps, to improve compliance and allow patients to monitor their disease and seek early interventions in order to prevent disabilities. I could not find any secondary sources summarizing this information. Since this is a Wikipedia article, it was written following Wikipedia's Guideline for Reliable Sources in Medicine. I have not added a new section on technology for the time being, however, I have flagged this on the talk page of the present leprosy Wikipedia article in order to work with the existing community of editors to fill this gap with high quality secondary sources.


 * Thank you again for this thorough and helpful review of the article. We welcome feedback at anytime. Note: I have included my aforementioned improvements in both this submission on wikiversity and in the current English Wikipedia article. I will follow further suggestions from the community on english Wikipedia and may be back to make some further tweaks to continue to improve this article. JenOttawa (discuss • contribs) 04:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)