Talk:Drug disposal

Untitled

Adding a section regarding examples of safe medication disposal would be helpful for anyone who accesses this page. Discuss various methods and examples of pharmacy take back programs and providing links. Carolyn.hua (talk) 18:26, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Article improvement goals (proposed edits): Add more information about the following: State Board of Pharmacy regulations for pharmacies to register as take-back facilities; (Example: California; San Francisco Safe Drug Disposal Stewardship Ordinance; Massachusetts, Vermont, Washington policies); National Take-Back Days; Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act; NABP's Local, State, and Federal sources for drug take-back; Extended producer responsibility laws.--Akliu (talk) 18:46, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

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): Sf659323, Carolyn.hua, Tranallens, Akliu. Peer reviewers: Erchan19.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 September 2018 and 14 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MLauCP133, Rachaelgordon, Sherrydadouzi, Woozers93. Peer reviewers: Sharonzhong93.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Reviews

Assessment of Neutrality

These recent edits contain useful new information about reasons for drug disposal and the implementation of medication disposal and take-back programs in California. They are effective and contain valuable information that complements the rest of the article. Most of the information is presented in a neutral way, citing official agency opinions or laws from the FDA or the DEA. However, there are a few parts that can be revised to be more neutral:

Under “Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2010”, the mentions about a “devastating” epidemic and the last sentence of the paragraph contain word choices with strong connotations that take away from the neutral viewpoint of the article. I would recommend using a different, more objective descriptor for the epidemic and consider removing the last sentence completely.

Otherwise, really great recent edits! --Tht001 (talk) 12:07, 05 November 2017 (UTC)

Assessment of Plagiarism or Copyright Violation

These edits did not have any signs of plagiarism or copyright violations. I could tell that the writers made an effort to phrase information in their own words, which is a difficult task when referencing a set of standards or regulations. I thought they did a great job summarizing articles and including relevant information from tables found in their references.

One potential edit: When you referenced "Article 0.1 of Division 17 of Title 16 of the California Code of Regulations" in the last section, did you mean Article 9.1?

Overall, I thought their information provided a lot of context to the article. They clarified many vague points by adding specific drug examples, disposal statistics, and examples of regulations. Great job! --Quynhkieu (talk) 07:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Assessment of Formatting Consistent with Wikipedia Medicine-Related Articles

The recent contributions to this page provide informative examples of the different ways that drugs may be disposed of. The inclusion of U.S. federal government initiatives (e.g., National Prescription Take Back Days) and policies (e.g., Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2010), and U.S. state guidelines (e.g., California Board of Pharmacy Regulations) are valuable because they educate the reader on drug disposal methods, while also providing examples of what the United States as a country has done to improve proper drug disposal. This latter information may provide useful guidance for other countries wishing to implement measures for appropriate drug disposal as well. Nice job on providing sound information!

The edits follow Wikipedia’s style manual for medicine-related articles – they are fact-based, objective, and don’t offer medical advice nor provide original research. Improvements can be made primarily in two areas: (1) simplifying technical terminology for non-experts in medicine and (2) writing for a global audience.

- Under “Reasons for disposal of drugs”, there is a statement “Accidental ingestion of medications prescribed for another individual is a leading source of poisonings in the household.” It’s unclear whether this is true just for the U.S. or in general worldwide. There are some technical terms present, such as “inappropriate medication use cases” and “pharmacodynamics.” The Wikipedia style manual suggests providing a short, simple English explanation in parentheses when mentioning technical terms for the first time. Paraphrasing (e.g., “cases involving inappropriate medication use”) or providing links to other Wikipedia pages on topics such as pharmacodynamics may be helpful.

- Under “Disposal of controversial drugs,” FDA is not defined and it’s unclear that this is a U.S. agency. Also readers may not understand what a “controlled substance” is, especially if this is a term specifically used in the U.S. A non-expert reader could accidentally infer from the writing that controlled substances are merely substances that are dangerous to pets and people, versus drugs with high abuse potential or prohibited.

- Under “National Prescription Drug Take-Back Days,” readers may not understand what “drug diversion” refers to. --Erchan19 (talk) 08:29, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Assessment of Verifiable Points with Secondary Sources

The recent edits were verifiable and included freely accessible secondary sources. Although primary sources (the Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2010 and Article 9.1 of Division 17 of Title 16 of the CA Code of Regulations) were cited, they were necessary to provide thorough descriptions of the Act and the take-back programs in CA pharmacies.

Some parts of the edits did not include citations:

• The last two sentences of the section “Reasons for disposal of drugs”
• The first sentence of the section “National Prescription Drug Take Back Days”
• The last three sentences of the subsection “Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2010”

Overall, the recent edits were great and helped increase my understanding of drug disposal! Essential topics, like reasons for drug disposal and current drug take-back efforts, were added to this Wikipedia article and help provide a more complete picture of drug disposal. --Lagunasunset (talk) 08:44, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Responses to Peer Reviews

Student 1

Thank you for these suggestions! I have edited the reference from "Article 0.1 of Division 17 of Title 16 of the California Code of Regulations" to indicated Article 9.1.

Student 2

I agree with all the suggestions! I added some references to the “Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2010” subsection. I also ended up changing some of my wording and removed the last sentence for that subsection to make it seem less biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sf659323 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Student 3

Really appreciate your feedback! In response to suggestions for “National Prescription Drug Take-Back Days":

• "Readers may not understand what “drug diversion” refers to": linked to wikipedia article about drug diversion
• "Citations: The first sentence of the section": added the DEA website as a citation

Also added a link to NADDI as another resource to users visiting this page. Akliu (talk) 03:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Student 4

The feedback was very constructive and helpful. I have edited to clear up the minor medical vocabulary issues mentioned in the "Reasons for disposal of drugs" section. Also added citations for the last two sentences of that section. I defined what FDA was for those living outside of the United States who may not be familiar with the abbreviation (This was a very good point brought up! It did not occur to me that readers of the article could be from all over the world). Also added more context to what a "controlled substance" is.

Went through and edited the grammar of this page (including sections we did not originally edit) to the best of my abilities. Carolyn.hua (talk) 11:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

CP133 Fall 2018 Proposed edits

We would like to add some information regarding state specific drug disposal policies (i.e. CA SB212), we would like to clean up formatting and potentially reorganize the article so the sections make more sense. We will focus on home generated medical waste, and not on institutional or manufacturing waste. MLauCP133 (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

CP133 Fall 2018 Group 17 Peer Edit

1. Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view? If not, specify… The draft reflected a neutral point of view. The group contributed extensively to the topic by including sources of drug for disposal, examples of practices in other countries, and examples of state regulations. The content is objective and well-referenced. The group's contributions are unbiased and offers limited subjective input. They also present the information with the appropriate evidence which seem to be purely informative and objective. Jessicalngo (talk) 13:41, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

2. Are the points included verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available? If not, specify… All references are reliable, high quality, and freely available to the public. The only exception is reference ""Flushing of Certain Medicines". U.S. Food and Drug Administration, aka reference#17, which is led to the main FDA website "Page Not Found". In addition, references 22 to 24 refer to the same material. Overall, the edits made by the group had great citation and working links.KNTran (talk) 21:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

3. Are the edits formatted consistent with Wikipedia’s manual of style? If not, specify… The edits formatted are consistent with Wikipedia's style. One minor formatting error is that a few citations (3, 4, 21-23, 25) did not immediately follow the period. One thing I also noticed was that citation 22-24 are the same link, so maybe combining these into one citation may be beneficial. Great job group! Maricayabyab (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

4. Is there any evidence of plagiarism or copyright violation? If yes, specify… There is no evidence of plagiarism or copyright violation. Group 20 contributed significant amount of content to the wiki page and did an amazing job citing secondary sources throughout the article. All the edits are properly cited and either summarized or paraphrased important points from the referenced sources. One thing I noticed is that in the the California Senate Bill 212 section, the edit quoted a sentence from reference 32. I would suggest the group to summarize or paraphrase it instead of using a direct quotation. Shengqix (talk) 17:47, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review (group 5's edits)

Q1: The draft shows a very neutral point of view. There does not seem to be any recommendations in any of the edits, and only facts were stated. Things like SB212 were stated objectively without any real bias. Also, a good example of neutrality was talking about the Alameda County Safe Drug Disposal Ordinance. This was simply all facts stating how it was the first county to make manufacturers pay for pharmaceutical waste. Overall, I think it was a job well done when it came to not choosing a side. -Tommylam0515 (talk) 18:57, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Q2: Sources are easily verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available. May consider moving up the definition of “medication waste” for clarity (towards the beginning of the “Sources of Drugs” section). Consider adding a citation under “National Prescription Drug Take Back Programs” section to support first sentence (“used prescriptions are serious safety concerns because they can be accidentally ingested, overdosed or diverted for illegal use”). -Sharonzhong93 (talk) 18:57, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Q3: It appears that the edits follow Wikipedias manual of style - neutral/unbiased tone, proper citations to support statements, and relevant information. One suggestion is to clarify that the majority of this article is referring to practices/options in the US. For others accessing this page, it might be a little confusing with the current flow and table of contents. A solution to this might be to move “Worldwide Drug Disposal Practices” to the end of the article or to change section titles to “National Prescription Drug Take Back Programs in the US” and “Examples of State Regulations in the US,” for example. -NsrUCSF (talk) 19:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Q4: Plagiarism and copyright violations were not found. Citations were provided when warranted; and the citations linked to public, easy to access sources. Leesursaur (talk) 19:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Response to Peer Edits 2018

Student 1

I have fixed citation 17 to link to the PDF of the directive, thank you for pointing that out. I have also changed the title of the National section to be more in line with the flow and formatting of the page overall. Thanks for the suggestion MLauCP133 (talk) 19:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Student 2

I also fixed citation 3 and 4 to be placed after the period to follow wikipedia's formatting guidelines. I also reviewed the rest of the Sources of Drugs section to make sure this formatting was consistent and correct. Thank you for the feedback and suggestion! Woozers93 (talk) 20:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Student 3

Updated the quotations in the CA Senate Bill 212 and paraphrased instead. Updated the citations 22-24, so they are all 22 now. Updated the citations 21-23 and 25, so they are all immediately following the period. Thank you groups for your feedback and suggestions! Rachaelgordon (talk) 18:37, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Student 4

Under “National Prescription Drug Take-Back Days,” added a definition of the “drug diversion”. Adding clarification to "disposal of controversial drug", last line that those product recommended immediate flush by the FDA. Adding the pharmacy in Canada can take back unused and expired medication. Thank you for the clarification and feedback! Sherrydadouzi (talk) 01:14, 21 November 2018 (UTC)