User:Williann1/sandbox

Planned additions/edits to the Wikipedia article "Compassion fatigue"

-There are many direct quotes, some even paragraphs long, that I will edit and condense to make it more encyclopedic

-Some statements are not cited that need to be so I will look for citations/put in "citation needed".

-Addition of research regarding resiliency training for nurses to prevent compassion fatigue and help combat current fatigue. Potter, P., Pion, S., & Gentry, J. E. (2015). Compassion fatigue resiliency training: The experience of facilitators. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 46(2), 83-88. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.gvsu.edu/10.3928/00220124-20151217-03 This trains nurses to adopt self-regulation, intentionality, perceptual maturation, connection, and self-care.

-Defining some of the consequences of compassion fatigue in the health care setting, including an inability to engage in an empathetic relationship, which impedes the health care professional from establishing a trusting relationship, along with the physical and psychological effects. Sorenson, Claire, PhD,R.N.C.-N.I.C., C.C.R.N., Bolick, Beth, DNP, ARNP, PPCNP-BC,C.P.N.P.-A.C., F.A.A.N., Wright, Karen,PhD., N.N.P.-B.C., & Hamilton, Rebekah, PhD, RN,C.N.L., F.A.A.N. (2017). An evolutionary concept analysis of compassion fatigue. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 49(5), 557-563. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.gvsu.edu/10.1111/jnu.12312

Wikipedia Reflection Essay

Throughout the course of this assignment, I found Wikipedia to be more complex and credible than I originally thought. There is more to it than people editing content to mess with people. I understand that it still is not the most credible source to use for academic purposes due to the incidence, albeit rare, of false edits.

            I selected my article based on the style of the current version. After participating in the training modules, I learned how Wikipedia envisions its articles to look. The goal is to have evidence-based facts in an encyclopedic format; this means no bias, opinion, or persuasion. It also means Wikipedia articles should not look like essays with direct quotes from specific sources, rather a statement of fact based on what those sources say. This is where I found my article fell short of the expectations. It was set up in a way that read more like a research paper than an encyclopedia entry.

            Before I edited my selected article for content, I evaluated an article on deep vein thrombosis for accuracy of information and presence of citations. The information was nearly comprehensive, with a few contradicting points that I pointed out in my entry on the talk page, and citations were present after almost every sentence. It is a well written article that contains a lot of valuable, well-supported information.

            With that as my template, I looked at my article on compassion fatigue. I found it to be lacking in depth, citations, and encyclopedic information. There were many direct quotes, some even paragraphs long, that I edited and condensed. Some statements were not cited that should have been, so I either found research to support the statements or removed them if the data did not agree.

            Beyond the formatting, I found the content to be lacking in information, so I found research to add to the portions of the article regarding compassion fatigue in the healthcare field and how to prevent it. I found a study about resiliency training to prepare healthcare professionals to combat compassion fatigue as well as a study on some of the lesser known consequences of compassion fatigue like the inability to empathize with patients. Both of these points added some depth to the article.  

            This newer version of the article sounds more factual and less like a research paper. The addition of information on compassion fatigue in the healthcare field contributes to the application of the article in practice and increases its usefulness.

            Part of our assignment was to do peer reviews on two classmates’ articles and make suggestions for improvement. I decided to review articles on SBAR and opioid overdose. The article on SBAR was well written, though the history section of the article was short and was lacking citations. There was mention of SBAR being used in the military, but no further information was provided. Personally, I would be interested in how/where in the military it was used. The article on opioid overdose was thorough and provided a good overview of what an opioid overdose was, but there was no discussion on the physiology an opioid overdose. It is not enough to say what the symptoms of an overdose are, there needs to be some sort of explanation as to what is going on in the body to cause those symptoms. There was also a brief mention of drug-seeking behaviors in the healthcare setting, but there were no examples of such behaviors. Drug-seeking behaviors cannot be identified if they are not described.

            There was one peer review on my article that focused on the lack of information regarding compassion fatigue in lawyers and other professions. This is something I identified also, but since those are not nursing related I did not take it upon myself to remedy that issue. I do agree with the peer reviewer that more should be added to those sections in order to warrant them being included in the article, but it was beyond the scope of my assignment.

            This assignment is different than any other assignment in that all of my contributions can be easily found by nearly anyone. I have found Wikipedia to be useful in finding quick answers to questions and have greater respect for its credibility after completing this assignment. It can be used as a quick, easy tool in patient education due to its ease of access and wealth of information.