Timeline for Refocusing from Health to Medical Sciences
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2018 at 15:35 | comment | added | Narusan | The only requirement we have is "a sound understanding of the natural sciences" (the "lowest" part of professionals) This site should not be about user's health problems. In order to be able to talk about medicine in general, you need to have a certain background. Much as like on MathOverflow, they won't teach you the basics of algebra and equations. The tool set and understanding doesn't need to be large, an understanding of scientific texts will be sufficient. | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 19:05 | comment | added | DoctorWhom | @Narusan was it in Health meta or in MedicalSciences? Having trouble finding it... | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 16:11 | comment | added | Narusan | @DoctorWhom We used to have a post explaining the scope of MedicalSciences. I wonder where did that go? Was it deleted? I think you formally owned it so only you can go looking for it. | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 1:36 | comment | added | DoctorWhom | I try to think of it how I would have approached the site as a pre-med or med student new to Stack Exchange. I remember when I was studying for the MCAT and the USMLE steps I was wishing I could find an online professional/academic caliber community to ask certain questions. I remember finding and joining BiologySE soon afterwards, and watching HealthSE grow/fall. If the site goes the way most of us hope it will, I would've read the scope and looked around, seen that I need to invest some effort into writing a well-informed well-phrased question, and given it a go. | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 1:29 | comment | added | StrongBad | @DoctorWhom I am not sure broad is the problem as much as the scope including things that people do not want to answer. I guess I wasn't sure if undergrad psych students and students aiming to get into med school in the US would be welcome. | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 1:22 | comment | added | DoctorWhom | We actually DO WANT STUDENTS to be a part of this community - as I thought was clear with "students of those professions" - so we should perhaps discuss whether we need to make it even more obvious? Some of our best answers and highest activity are from pre-med students who exhibit professional-caliber research skills. | |
| Jun 19, 2018 at 1:19 | comment | added | DoctorWhom | There are only 10 active users on this site BECAUSE the scope of Health is too broad. Many people come, but nobody with professional knowledge (including students) sticks around. Imagine if on academia no matter what you did, >80% of your questions were clearly homework questions, random musings and speculation, or questions with nearly zero attempt to answer it themselves - and therefore things that either need to be closed or dramatically edited to even be remotely answerable. Professionals and advanced students would become exhausted trying to keep up with it all, burn out, and leave. | |
| Jun 18, 2018 at 22:13 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | A nitpick with a devilish grin: you have joined already! – While I share your concern for the dangers of a scope too narrow to a certain degree, we arrived at that point coming from the insight that HealthSE is currently not well defined and very possibly just too broad. Your suggestions are in scope from my view of affairs and I guess we should edit them both (if you have more, bring them as well) into the base of the former area51-proposal above. | |
| Jun 18, 2018 at 15:48 | history | answered | StrongBad | CC BY-SA 4.0 |