Talk:Hanhart syndrome

GPT-4-assisted peer review
Some comments about this article, from a chatbot:
 * In the lead section, the sentence "Hanhart syndrome is classified as a rare disease, with only 30 known cases having been diagnosed between 1932 and 1991." could be updated to include any new cases reported since 1991, if available.
 * In the "Discovery and etymology" section, it would be helpful to provide more context about Dr. Hanhart, such as his full name and occupation, as well as additional details about the first description of the syndrome.
 * In the "Pathophysiology" section, the sentence "The name 'hypoglossia-hypodactylia syndrome' was proposed in 1971 as a more accurate name for the disorder, which is used synonymously." should be moved to the "Discovery and etymology" section, as it is more relevant to the naming of the condition.
 * The "Pathophysiology" section could benefit from more precise explanations of the medical terms used, such as "hypomelia" and "glossopalatine ankylosis." This would help make the article more accessible to readers without a medical background.
 * In the "Causes and prevalence" section, the statement "Between 1932 and 1991, 30 case of Hanhart syndrome were diagnosed" has a minor typographical error and should be corrected to "cases."
 * In the "Diagnosis and treatments" section, the sentence "Differential diagnosis of Hanhart syndrome must rule out Nager syndrome and acro-facial dysostosis, Johnson Hall Krous Syndrome, and Goldenhar Syndrome." could provide more context by briefly explaining the key differences between these conditions and Hanhart syndrome.
 * The "Notable cases" section could be expanded to provide more details about Nick Santonastasso's life, such as his achievements and how he has adapted to living with Hanhart syndrome. Additionally, if there are other notable cases or public figures associated with the syndrome, they could be included in this section.
 * In the "References" section, it is essential to check that all the citations are accurate and up-to-date. Some references, such as reference 3, are duplicated in the list and should be consolidated.
 * Throughout the article, it would be helpful to ensure that all medical terms and abbreviations are consistently used and defined on first mention. For example, "OLHS" is used in the "Causes and prevalence" section but is not defined until the "Pathophysiology" section.
 * The article could benefit from additional images and diagrams to help illustrate the various symptoms and features of Hanhart syndrome. For example, a diagram illustrating the five types of Hanhart syndrome or an image showing the facial features associated with the condition could be helpful for readers.


 * "Here are some specific sentences that might be improved:
 * Original sentence: "Hanhart syndrome is part of the larger 'oromandibular-limb hypogenesis syndrome (OLHS)' family of conditions, which are collectively characterized by the underdevelopment of the mouth, jaw, tongue, and extremities."
 * Suggested improvement: "Hanhart syndrome belongs to the broader category of 'oromandibular-limb hypogenesis syndromes (OLHS)', a group of conditions characterized by the underdevelopment of the mouth, jaw, tongue, and limbs."
 * Original sentence: "Complete loss of the tongue (aglossia) and fingers (adactylia) have not been reported."
 * Suggested improvement: "Neither complete loss of the tongue (aglossia) nor fingers (adactylia) has been reported in Hanhart syndrome cases."
 * Original sentence: "The prevalence of Hanhart syndrome within consanguineous patients lead to an early hypothesis that a mutation in an autosomal recessive gene led to the condition."
 * Suggested improvement: "The prevalence of Hanhart syndrome among consanguineous patients prompted early hypotheses suggesting that a mutation in an autosomal recessive gene could be responsible for the condition."
 * Original sentence: "Diagnosis of Hanhart syndrome previously used CVS during the early stages of pregnancy, first 10 weeks of amenorrhoea."
 * Suggested improvement: "Previously, diagnosing Hanhart syndrome involved using chorionic villous sampling (CVS) during the first 10 weeks of amenorrhea in the early stages of pregnancy."
 * Original sentence: "This testing method has since been abandoned due a correlation between CVS early in a pregnancy and oromandibular limb dysgenesis, leading to a decrease in prenatal diagnoses."
 * Suggested improvement: "This testing method has since been abandoned due to a correlation between CVS performed early in pregnancy and oromandibular limb dysgenesis, which has led to a decrease in prenatal diagnoses."
 * Original sentence: "Treatments for Hanhart syndrome vary depending on the specific symptoms per patient."
 * Suggested improvement: "Treatments for Hanhart syndrome vary, depending on the specific symptoms experienced by each patient."
 * Original sentence: "Special consideration of the airway must be taken during operations under anesthesia due to craniofacial deformities."
 * Suggested improvement: "During operations under anesthesia, special consideration must be given to the airway management due to the presence of craniofacial deformities in patients with Hanhart syndrome."
 * Original sentence: "The prevalence of Hanhart syndrome within consanguineous patients lead to an early hypothesis that a mutation in an autosomal recessive gene led to the condition."
 * Suggested improvement: "The high prevalence of Hanhart syndrome among consanguineous patients led to an early hypothesis suggesting that a mutation in an autosomal recessive gene might be the cause of the condition."
 * Original sentence: "Hanhart syndrome follows an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern, has a population prevalence of <1/1,000,000, and due to its rarity has been classified as a rare disease."
 * Suggested improvement: "Hanhart syndrome, which follows an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern and has a population prevalence of fewer than 1 in 1,000,000, has been classified as a rare disease due to its rarity."
 * Original sentence: "These syndromes are differentiated by the type and severity of facial and limb deformities."
 * Suggested improvement: "These syndromes can be differentiated based on the type and severity of the facial and limb deformities they present."
 * Original sentence: "Ultrasound examination of the cranial and abdominal regions in patients has found that internal structures are unaffected by Hanhart syndrome."
 * Suggested improvement: "Ultrasound examinations of the cranial and abdominal regions in patients with Hanhart syndrome have shown that internal structures are typically unaffected by the condition."

Hopefully you can find some helpful suggestions in here. Esculenta (talk) 05:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Review
@Dancing Dollar, first off, thank you for taking up the review, the medical articles don't often get much traction at WP:GA. Upon reading the review, I am a bit concerned about the brevity of the notes given. Can you please elaborate about what information is absent from the article? Specific examples/sources would be most appreciated since I've largely exhausted what information I have access to and don't think that there is anything else to add. This is a very niche disease with not a lot of coverage. This also runs into a similar issue with the 'updating' recommendation, since there isn't anything more recent that exists. Attempting to update it on my own would just violate WP:OR. I would also disagree with the 'notable case' section suggestion, since expanding on the one notable case would just warrant making an article for the person mentioned.

Also, the issue regarding FN 1 and FN 3 is incorrect. They are both from the same website but are different sources. Yes, we could argue that FN 1 being a truncated version of FN 3, but that is hardly fail criteria for 2a since they are different sources. I'm open to hearing the argument either way but likely won't change it (Did you click on the archived link or the listed one?). In case you're curious, I didn't include the GTP-4 suggestions due to a mess at WP:ANI a few weeks ago, that resulted in Esculenta getting temporarily banned.

While I disagree with the quickfail overall, I won't quibble over it since I think that the page being a bit WP:TECHNICAL is a fair point. I am unsure how to go about revising it since there are many GAs at this level of technicality and the only way I could simplify would introduce a lot of redundant terms. If you have any suggestions, I would greatly appreciate them. Thanks again, 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 00:12, 20 May 2023 (UTC)


 * @Dancing Dollar, pinging you again since I see you're actively editing. Can you please provide some explanation on the points listed above. I appreciate the review but need details due to the brevity/broadness of the concerns you listed. This isn't intended to indict your review in any way, I just need further explanation. Thanks, 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 03:56, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello I believe you might have listed one or two more treatments for hanhart syndrome and explained why there aren't more options available for the ailment; prostheses, for instance, are a remedy that isn't mentioned. In addition, there were a few typos in the article, such as "A 1 year old," which is why I failed it under 1a.  Dancing  Dollar  ( let's talk ) 13:45, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Dancing Dollar Thanks for getting back to me. I was able to dig up a source that expands a little bit on treatments. That being said, it isn't a whole lot to add and I'm concerned that a whole couple of sentences warranted a 3b fail. It isn't WP:GA criteria to cover every single minutia. Likewise, a "few typos" is a hard sell for a 1a fail, especially when it is customary for reviewers to resolve minor issues on their own. If there is something more serious that I am missing, please let me know, I am not infallible after all. I am just getting a bit lost with your recommended changes and would really appreciate a more detailed breakdown, particularly I'd like to know why it quick-failed instead of going on hold. I'd prefer to not make the same mistakes again, whatever they may be. 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 18:13, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * During the review, where were you? Were you camouflaged? If so, wow, your camouflage is impressive. I did put it on hold for two days but you were not there.  Dancing  Dollar ( let's talk ) 13:23, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Dancing Dollar Ohhh, I understand now. When I saw the review I figured that it wasn't finished since it was rather brief. I'd recommend pinging users when the review is finished, or using the 'on hold' feature in the GA nomination template to notify people. Otherwise putting a message on the GA1 page that states the review is finished avoids confusion. It's all the same in the end, thanks for clarifying. 🏵️ Etrius ( Us) 14:17, 27 May 2023 (UTC)