Talk:Engel classification

Editor Info

I am an undergraduate psychology student at Nebraska Wesleyan University and will be working with my instructor Michele Petracca https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Psychology_CU and the APS Wikipedia Initiative to improve this article this semester. Any suggestions or input along the way would be greatly appreciated. MSederberg21 (talk) 04:55, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Sources

Articles related to this topic:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16619654

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1046/j.1528-1157.2001.35100.x/asset/j.1528-1157.2001.35100.x.pdf;jsessionid=5630A2478630EE5FC454DB45AC9C683B.f03t03?v=1&t=hsfm6tbv&s=6d42045c46d9fac026feca75245be2eb7f4c01a3

http://www.massgeneral.org/neurology/forPhysicians/epilepsy/pro_EngelEpiSurgOutcomeScale.aspx

http://jhasim.com/aanhighlights/cs_set8.cfm

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2010.02542.x/full — Preceding unsigned comment added by MSederberg21 (talk • contribs) 06:11, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Outline

Since this current article just has the very basics of the Engel classifications, I plan to add some background information. This information would probably be included in a history section where I might mention the who, what, when, where, and how Engel came up with this classification system. Then I plan to add a section where I give more detailed information for each classification listed. For example, Class I is currently defined as "free of disabling seizures." I might try to find more information on what exactly that means, like what qualifies a seizure as "disabling." Finally, I might add a final section on the reception of the classification system, specifically in the medical community. This would include why healthcare professionals have both criticized and praised this classification system. As I mentioned earlier, any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated! MSederberg21 (talk) 05:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

All of your grammar and sentence structure is well done and the reader can easily flow through the article. The organization of the article is also done well, making it easy to flow through the article. I think you have really good information on the disadvantages of the classification system, but I might add a section about the advantages of the system as well. If you wanted, you could also expand more upon the history of the classification system and what systems were used before, or if there are any more prevalent ranking systems still used today. You could also expand more on Engel himself and his background, and why his classification system was chosen. Great work on your article so far! Shelbyknorr23 (talk) 03:01, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

I like that you have spread this information out over a few different sections as opposed to just focusing on one area of the topic. Is there any other history that went into this? That section is the only one that looks like it might be lacking information compared to the others. Other than that, great job! Derek Hord (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:02, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Engel classification. 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/20140407085207/http://jhasim.com/aanhighlights/cs_set8.cfm to http://jhasim.com/aanhighlights/cs_set8.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 10:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)