Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a25ca63cb84e97b7

Jump to content

Talk:Enteric fever

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 4 months ago by TigerTheGodfather in topic Peer Review

Wiki Education assignment: 2025-26 TCOM WikiMed

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 March 2026 and 28 March 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sumnagaram (article contribs). Peer reviewers: TigerTheGodfather.

— Assignment last updated by Butterchicken228 (talk) 01:18, 19 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Plan

[edit]

The article currently is short and missing significant information about pathophysiology, symptoms, diagnostic tests, treatment, and recent advances in vaccination programs.

I intend to organize the article into various sections: Pathophysiology, Epidemiology, Clinical Manifestation, Diagnosis, Treatment, Vaccination efforts, and Concerns with antibiotic resistance.

For the pathophysiology section, add to the current part of the article about the various serovars and how Salmonella Enterica infects the body at a cellular level as well as genetic variations that affect pathogenicity citing Source 5.

For the epidemiology section which is currently missing, more information about where the disease is most prevalent and changes in patterns as well as subgroups such as travellers who are mainly affected and age distribution in cases and how prognosis can change in these various subgroups.

Clinical manifestations will include discussing the similarities and differences between infection with the typhoid and paratyphoid presentations and symptoms such as fever, bradycardia, rose spots, and hepatosplenomegaly, etc. Further information on clinical manifestation within certain subgroups such as India vs. Africa and differences between these groups in how the disease presents and progresses can be discussed.

The diagnosis section will fill in the missing information about using blood cultures for diagnosis as well as new research into biomarkers and Widal test. Further discussion about more point of care tools can be used as well as recent research into this form of diagnostic tests in areas where standard of care is not always accessible.

For the treatment section, empiric treatment of Floroquinolones, Azithrymycin, and Ceftriaxone will be discussed as well as the recent concerns for multi-drug resistant and extensively drug resistance strains of S. enterica and how antibiotic coverage is broadening to include these strains.

Finally, the last section will be vaccination which will cover and reference many papers citing the importance of vaccination programs to prevent disease and statistics on how it improves morbidity and mortality in vulnerable populations and areas where Enteric Fever is endemic. Sumnagaram (talk) 20:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Peer Review

[edit]

Peer Review:

The page appears to be contain up to date information, in a neutral tone and a great structure containing:

1. An updated lead with an introductory sentence, a description of major sections, only information present in the article with a concise and brief description of each section.

2, The content added is relevant to the topic, uptodate with most citations from peer reviewed articles less than 10 years old and it addresses enteric fever which is historically related to underrepresented population.

3. The tone is neutral, no claim appear biased as the article only seek to inform and not to convince. No viewpoint is over or underrepresented.

4. All new contents are backed up by reliable sources and most of them are recent sources (less than 10 years old), the sources reflect what the content say and there are no better sources available. All sources on the document can be easily opened.

5. The content added is well written, no major grammatical errors and well organized.

6. The content however contains a lot of words that could be linked to allow user to check out those words wikipedia page. Some of those words include Gram negative bacteria, enterobacteriacae, flagella, PPI, reticulo endothelial system, transaminases, cytokines, incubation period, S.typhi, chlorination, myalgia, bradycardia, anemia, leukopenia, splenomegaly...

7. The last citation (15) also needs to be updated to reflect appropriate wikipedia format (click on check date values).

8. Article includes image that enhances understanding of the topic and it's well captioned, adheres to wikipedia copyright regulations and laid out in a visually appealing way. TigerTheGodfather (talk) 18:04, 24 March 2026 (UTC)Reply