Talk:Therapeutic effect

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Statistics Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Article needs overhaul[edit]

This article seems very use, the middle section seems to meander a bit from the original focus to pontificating about modern medicine over holistic. since therapeutic effect theoretically covers any medical treatment, this article could use quite an overhaul. but I notice quite a few edits done and would like some input before I start making major changes to it. things would be easier if said editors would at the least list the changes they've made when they make them, it could make future editors lives a little easier. Syzergy 01:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancy between articles[edit]

From the Side Effects disambiguation page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side-effect) Therapeutic effect is "unintended but desirable consequence". On this page "...whether the result was expected, unexpected, or even an unintended consequence of the treatment." Can it be an intended consequence then? Charleej (talk) 17:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)cj[reply]

Dubious current content[edit]

The tone and sophistication of the existing content of this article are non-encyclopedic, even sophomoric; alongside the complete lack of citations (disallowing content verification), the article is wholly untrustworthy and demands expert attention. Note, this article is linked to by the "efficacy" article, which is in a comparable shambles. In addition, drug safety is poorly covered (redirect is to the pharmacovigilance article). Hence, the two overarching criteria guiding global regulatory approval of small molecule and biologics as therapeutic agents—safety and efficacy—are not covered by any standard of adequacy here at Wikipedia. On the bright side, if we ensure small sample sizes in comparative studies, and carefully choose which articles to compare/avoid comparing, Nature Publishing Group will continue to find us equivalent in quality to Encyclopedia Britannica. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some specific examples[edit]

All three major sections are, from the perspective of clear, encyclopedic prose, near to gibberish. Here are a few specific examples related to the categories appearing in the "Cleanup" tag:

vague language — "Many people think…" and "...everything in the world…"
inexperienced level of understanding:

"no... difference between therapeutic and undesired side effects" [in what abstract world are on-target and off-target effects interchangeable?]
"Products from nature are essentially always complex mixtures of large numbers of different chemical agents…"

[ in trials of isolated natural products? or is this a reference to homeopathic or naturopathic approaches?]

various basic English issues — e.g., subject-verb agreement, "people think of… effects as only applying to… but... It applies to…"
together leading to content bordering on complete nonsense:

"recognition and quantification of the situation, in multiple dimensions, is a critical prerequisite"
"the number of interacting issues… make understanding and knowing all the issues a mind-boggling complex task which... is never totally understandable"
"However, everything in the world has multiple and varying responses when used…"
"A pharmaceutical grade agent does not make the patient any more simple but it does greatly simplify, narrow and make more definable and predictable both the usual desirable and undesirable effects of the treatment agent…"

This is only the smallest sampling. A major redaction and rewrite is called for. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 08:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite effort in progress[edit]

This article is not good in most ways. I took a copy to a sandbox and I'm gonna give it a got to rewrite it. Medical articles ought to be much better.

If anyone is interested in collaborating with me on this effort that would be great. Rap Chart Mike (talk) 18:53, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I took a major swipe at this today and have tried to improve a big chunk of the article. In order to make my editing easier to follow I did in three chunks rather then my typical full paste in. Over the course of the next week or so I will continue to investigate the topic and fill the article out more. Hopefully this will prompt efforts from other editors as well and we will get this article closer to where it should be. Rap Chart Mike (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Had enough here for the day. Back at tomorrow and probably as done as I care to be by middle of next week. Rap Chart Mike (talk) 19:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]