Talk:Brief resolved unexplained event
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Brief resolved unexplained event.
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of Brief resolved unexplained event be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2020 and 31 January 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rjbustami. Peer reviewers: MelanieBui.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Student Project
[edit]WikiProject Medicine UCF COM 2020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjbustami (talk • contribs) 21:13, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
This is RJ Bustami, a medical student at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine, who will be attempting to edit this article on BRUEs. My major goals are to add further details about the condition and possibly restructure the page, all while gathering together additional resources than what has already been used. It appears the sources used are only guideline-based, so will also include other types of articles in my additions/editing, such as systematic reviews, textbooks, etc. Hopefully this will gain credibility and popularity for the page and people will have more awareness about this unfortunate illness. My plan for each section is as follows:
Introduction
The summary here is already fairly inclusive of all the salient points of the condition. Will possibly reword some of the summary and include some minor history.
Definition
This section has no sources cited. Will also have a subsection labelled "low-risk BRUE" to distinguish how clinicians determine whether the child is at risk of having another event or that there is a life threat. Will use review articles, textbooks, and systematic review, found through PubMed, to summarize the current literature's definition of BRUE (even though it may apply to the previous synonymous term, ALTE).
Epidemiology
This is an valuable section to the audience who may be interested for conditions like this one and I feel this addition will be valuable, as there are sources to cite for this information.
Causes
This section also lacks sourcing and the literature has described additional causes for BRUE, which I will include.
Management
The management sounds slightly biased and also uses medical jargon, which I will reword while also adding some details about the management of this condition. I do like the mention of how management changes according to the "risk" stratification of the disease, though, so will maintain that as a structural guideline.
Prognosis
This is also a highly desirable point to be made on a seemingly life-threatening illness that the audience may want to see, and currently there is literature on the rough estimates of prognosis, so considering adding this section.
Rjbustami (talk) 15:54, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
WikiProject Medicine Winter 2020 Peer Review
[edit]Hi RJ. I am peer reviewing your article. Overall you did a great job on adding to the article and making it more robust from its basic starting point. I agree with your workplan that the introduction had a decent summary about BRUEs. One suggestion for this section would be to add a sentence to summarize the causes section and your newly added prognosis section just to make it a fuller summary of the entire article.
I really like the History section that you added. A lot of times we focus on all the medical aspects that we forget the background of an illness and how it has evolved over time. I found this section to be insightful about BRUEs. My only suggestion would be to cite every sentence with the reference that you gathered the information from.
For the Definition section, I think you added a good comprehensive description of a BRUE. I like that you included the criteria for an event to be considered a BRUE. I also liked that you listed them out as bullet points as I think this is more visually appealing and easier to read.
For the Causes section, the subsection for other causes was a great addition that made the list more comprehensive. I think this is a great section overall and didn’t know that there were so many associated causes. I noticed that the last sentence you added for other causes does not have a citation, so my suggestion would be to add the reference if you are able to include it.
You did a great job outlining the steps for evaluating and diagnosing a BRUE. I really like how you edited the management section. You made it easy to understand from the parent/patient perspective about what steps may be taken. A suggestion for this section would be to link some of the terminology to other WikiPedia pages (i.e. link urinalysis, complete blood count, chest x-ray, etc).
I am glad you added a Prognosis section. I think this is an important section that a lot of readers are interested in knowing, especially if faced with experiencing such a terrifying event. An Epidemiology section would have been a nice addition like you had initially intended, but I totally understand if it was hard to find information from reliable sources to make that section.
Great job on adding more references. The article could still benefit from more, but I know that a topic like this may have limited reliable resources available that can be used. I did notice that 2 of the references are the same, but the citation was written differently. It’s #4 and #7 (Risk of Death in Infants...), if you’re able to fix that. Otherwise, it was great reading the article and seeing how much you were able to improve it! MelanieBui (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Response from Rami Bustami to Peer Review
Hi Melanie, thanks for your suggestions! I took several of your suggestions into action on the page and I agree wholeheartedly with them. I appreciate your help in making this page as robust as possible, which has been tough since, like you said, the data is pretty limited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjbustami (talk • contribs) 01:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)