Talk:Sundowning

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 June 2021 and 27 August 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): W.nguyen, Future UCSF PharmD, William.p.chau, X. Chen, UCSF. Peer reviewers: Tliu.ucsf.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Abuse of the PMID code

Adding references by providing nothing but the PMID code is not acceptable per WP:CITE. JFW | T@lk 21:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I gather them, then expand them in a batch. (Actually, I hope someone else comes by and does the expanding themselves.) --Una Smith (talk) 04:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Sundowning (dementia) and Sundown syndrome are about the same content. I'm not an expert, but from the references it appears that sundowning is the more standard term. Given this and the fact that Sundowning (dementia) has more complete information, I am proposing that content from Sundown syndrome be merged into Sundowning (dementia), and that Sundown syndrome be replaced by a redirect. --Mysdaao ^talk 15:08, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

• Support merge. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support merge. Never heard it described as a 'syndrome'. Basie (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support merge. I regret I didn't find Sundown syndrome when I looked for an article on the topic before I created Sundowning (dementia); I would have simply moved it then. --Una Smith (talk) 03:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
• Support merge. No sense to have both of them.--Garrondo (talk) 08:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Una Smith (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

deadlink removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.91.241 (talk) 17:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Move Proposal

I have submitted a technical request for this page to be moved to Sundowning. This page very clearly deserves the primary title and not the album who's title is a reference to the medical phenomenon. nicholus.h 13:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholus.h (talk • contribs)

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 12:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

---

Sundowning (dementia) → Sundowning –

• the medical term should have the primary title, especially given that the album that currently has the title is a reference to the medical term. nicholus.h 13:25, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
• Sounds reasonable. I'd support that. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
• Found it ludicrous that this wasn't primary. Definitely move.PacificBoy 11:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

low blood pressure

not discussed is the observed association with 'sun downing' of low blood pressure, esp associated with persons in excellent to outstanding health who have on sitting reclining very, low blood pressure, BUT, on arising and getting moving and active again, ENTIRELY, LOSE all their confusion and are OK; so, the discussion of circadian rhythem clock can also somewhat tie into this related subject/issue, but they actually are not the same thing ... you can see such very low blood pressure e.g. with triathelon performaners who can get into such superior condition, that on sitting down, their blood pressure drops to very low readings and the similar same very low blood pressure occurs with excellent condition, older persons, but also adds that 'sundowner' like confusion. 2ton tony !! 24.44.215.132 (talk) 23:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Citing Symptoms

Tremors as a symptom should be cited. -Immcarle39 (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

To improve "Causes" section

The first sentence of this section states that "some evidence suggests..." without citing any source. On that note, the whole section cites only two sources for a lot of information. Also, the sentence "sundowning should be distinguished from delirium..." seems to be persuasive when this information is supposed to be neutral. I think it would be appropriate to include this in different wording if there are sources that differentiate the two. -Immcarle39 (talk) 22:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Foundation II 2021 Group 30 proposed edits

- Change wording of "patient" to people per William's suggestion [complete & Continue]

- Add new references

X. Chen, UCSF (talk) 21:50, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

- Add mechanisms of how treatments for sundowning treatments work (ensure lay language, be sure to link other Wikipedia articles)

- Add section specific to pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment

- Add section regarding proposed etiologies

- Add additional references when appropriate upon literature search

- Add more background to the history of Sundowning / Sundown Syndrome

- Add controversy section and expand on ideas there + add relevant references when necessary

William.p.chau (talk) 20:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

- Addition of Relevance

- Addition of Risk Factors

- Addition of Future Directions

- Add references

W.nguyen, Future UCSF PharmD (talk) 18:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Foundations II 2021 Group 1 Peer Review Comments

This group substantially added to the article by adding relevant information on serotonin's potential causation of sundowning, a Risk Factors and Future Directions (maybe re-title to Research Directions, since it's not always implied that directions refer to research) section, and significant contributions to the Treatment section. I'm not sure that the addition of a Controversy section was necessary, and the content under this new section could proably be summarized in the opening paragraph. The relevance section also seems unnecesary and isn't a standard section under the Manual of Style; perhaps putting this under prognosis and expanding with statistics of these outcomes would make more sense. Overall, this group has done a great job of achieving their overall goals stated above and added a lot of useful content to this article. The edits are formatted consistent with Wikipedia's MOS, opting to retain the existing style of utilizing bulleted lists under sections rather than prose for organization, and reading in an clear, precise and easy to understand encyclopedic tone. ReevA.LUating (talk) 21:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

This group did a great job of improving the article as they found relevant information that pertained to sundowning given that there was already some substantial writing for the description of the syndrome. Given that we are student pharmacists, I was glad to see the insightful portions about sundowning treatment that were added to the article. I will say at times I was concerned for how much medical jargon was included in the article's "future directions" portion so I am not too sure how easily readable this article may be for some. Looking at the group's intended goals, it seems as though they were able to complete all of their objectives and other additions (such as the disturbances in circadian rhythm section) while editing this article. The edits in the article also reflect language that supports diversity, equity, and inclusion, as the term "person" or "people" is used quite frequently. NAbuGharbiyeh (talk) 21:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Neda

Do the group’s edits substantially improve the article as described in the Wiki peer review “guiding framework”?

Yes, the group’s edits added substantial content to the article that helped improve readers’ understanding of sundowning syndrome. The Relevance segment helps with establishing some sort of credibility for the syndrome, as it isn’t currently listed in the DSM-5. This information can help individuals who may have signs and symptoms of this syndrome but may face challenges from society that their situation may not be “real”. Additional evidence has been added to the causes section, shedding new light on the article’s subject. The addition of a “Future Directions” segment has also been a great positive for this article as it allows for further discussion on the topic as well as provides readers with some points from which to further expand on and explore the topic. The “Controversy” segment was a great addition as well, as it grants an additional perspective into better understanding this syndrome and its prevalence.

Has the group achieved its overall goals for improvement?

I believe that the group has largely met its goals for improvement, adding in sections on Relevance, Risk Factors, Future Directions, and Controversy. They also met goals for the treatment section, adding in substantial amounts to both the non-pharm and pharm treatment. I think overall, the group has done well in polishing the article and contributing new and pertinent information and research.

Does the draft submission reflect a neutral point of view?

I believe that the draft submission reflects an overall neutral point of view. I did take notice of a line in “Non-pharm. Treatments,” the third bullet point: “Check for over-napping. People may wish to take naps during the day…Physical activity is a treatment of Alzheimer’s and a way to encourage night sleep” I think maybe just rewording this bullet would help/it is already kind of touched upon in the first bullet point of the section. Maybe something like: “Overnapping may unintentionally affect night sleep. Physical activity in conjunction with the consistent sleeping schedule and daily routine may help to encourage night sleep.” I think the mention of Alzheimer’s may associate Sundowning as a “non-official” syndrome (since it already isn’t mentioned in the DSM-5) and may harm the reader’s perception of the syndrome subconsciously. Understandably, sundowning is associated with Alzheimer’s but I think the way that this point is presented sounds more like having sundowning means you have Alzheimer’s. Other than that though, great job! Tliu.ucsf (talk) 22:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

This groups improved the article very well. Most of the sentences were easy to read (some were a bit confusing; see below). This group made improvement on the article based on their goals. It appears that missing citations were added. In addition, another goal was to add the mechanism of how treatments work, but I felt that the explanation on pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments were vague. Maybe there were not much resources available to elaborate. I did like that you separated the section into pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. Lastly, I could tell that you changed "patients" to "people", but I found just one (under "risk factors"). The resources cited were secondary, verifiable, and freely available. I visited some pages that you have cited. PubMed was predominant used, and they were systematic reviews. These articles were accessible without subscription. I like the bullet point format, but it may not be appropriate for a Wikipedia article (some sections are in bullet point, others are paragraph). Maybe using more "subheadings" will be good to organize each section. In addition, I found some sentences to have grammar errors or awkward wording. Overall, good job, everyone! --Atompkins1 (talk) 22:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Reference Review Foundations II 2021

W.nguyen, Future UCSF PharmD reviewed #1-10; William.p.chau reviewed #11-21; X.Chen UCSF reviewed #22-31

The "Sundowning" group has reviewed our references and the references are in line with the format described in the Manual of Style.

No predatory publishers were detected during this review.

No duplicates were found in this review.

X. Chen, UCSF (talk) 21:07, 4 August 2021 (UTC) William.p.chau (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC) W.nguyen, Future UCSF PharmD (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)