Talk:Kawasaki disease/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello :) We'll begin the review in a couple days or so... I need to read thru closely and prepare, etc., first. Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your efforts, and I ll be working with you on this :-) M aen K. A.  Talk  10:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we can start now :) I like to focus on just a few issues at a time, so things don't seem overwhelming; I also like the nominator to set the pace of the review. Since you or whomever helps (if) will be doing the work, feel free to take as much time as you choose... and holler when you're ready! No hurry, ever :)

Now, about the article; we are definitely getting it to GA... but we have a lot of stuff to do. You've done some good work generally defining the disease; now we'll go deeper! So, first up:


 * The article is under-cited and under-referenced. Every sentence and list item must be cited, the exception being that several sentences/list items/a paragraph is verifiably covered by a source. If the latter is the case, one citation at the end of the paragraph or list is fine :) Also, we need to increase the number of journal sources; but as the article grows, that'll happen naturally. We must not have any 'citation needed' stickers, either.


 * The first section should be a Classification section. Where does Kawasaki disease fit in alongside other inflammatory autoimmune diseases affecting the cutaneous tissue and mucosa associated with the lymphatic system? How is KD delineated from other such diseases? Classification should address things like that. Here's an example of a GA Classification section.

Well, that's enough stuff to worry about until you are ready to move on. Absolutely, tell me/ask me whatever you are concerned with or need :) And always, take whatever time you need! Rcej (Robert) - talk 08:16, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * First thank you for giving me the chance to chose the pace, and that is exactly what I want, since as you know I am a medical student and I am busy studying most of the time, I am currently working on this, which is a list of resources I will use to improve the article, I don't want to disrupt the article over a long period, so I started collecting them under a subpage, And I ll inform you when I am done. Thank you again M aen K. A.  Talk  13:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well hello aren't you prepared :) Cool subpage! Rcej (Robert) - talk 01:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * thank you :-), and I am sorry for that, its just that I ve just had a big pediatrics exam, and I was too busy to get things ready before you did the review M aen K. A.  Talk  07:45, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No need to apologize :) I've done the exact same thing during a very tedious review where I was the nominator. I became a subpageaholic! I had the page deleted once I didn't need it. Rcej (Robert) - talk 08:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * How about this as a start for the classification section, I want to develop it under a subpage before moving to article M aen K. A.  Talk  17:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Great start! One thing to keep in mind when writing medicine articles especially, is to use as neutral of syntax as possible; for instance where you have "...preferably coronary arteries.", you might want to weaken that slightly to read something like "...often including coronary arteries." :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Shall I use multiple citations for the same statement like you did here?? M aen K. A.  Talk  17:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The reason I do that sometimes is because the entire statement could only be supported by all of those particular sources collectively, and since I don't like to ref within a sentence... I just pile them up after the end of the sentence. That's a very acceptable referencing style too, and much neater looking :) Makes for easier rewrites, also! Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Great, I am currently adding multiple references to the article you may need to check that M aen K. A.  Talk  17:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice! But don't worry about wikilinking the journal titles... unecessary, a hassle, and some persnickity medical wiki-ers actually frown on it :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 03:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the advise about the linking of the journal titles, are we done with the classification section now?? M aen K. A.  Talk  16:31, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Not ready yet :) Let's flesh out two areas: 1. What finding(s) in KD within the designation 'systemic vasculitis' delineates it from others of that designation? Specify the findings and the other disorders . 2. Is KD typically known to affect medium-sized vasculature? Clarify, and mention other disorders in this area too. Rcej (Robert) - talk 03:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it Done now :-) M aen K. A.  Talk  13:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope. Gotta go for now, tho... we'll resume shortly :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 08:41, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok...I'm back :) Here's what the Classification section needs now:


 * Define the term "necrotizing". ✅ M aen K. A.  Talk  22:50, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Tell us what comprises necrotizing vasculitis, clinically. Delineate the KD version of necrotizing vasculitis from the non-KD version. ✅ M aen K. A.  Talk  10:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Specify how "It affects small and medium sized blood vessels, in particular coronary arteries."
 * Do you suggest that I talk about the pathogenesis here?? please be more specific, what do you mean by how?? M aen K. A.  Talk  10:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right... that's best left for pathophysiology. Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * "It is a syndrome affecting multiple organ systems, and in the acute stage of KD, systemic inflammatory changes are evident in many organs." Describe the inflammatory changes.
 * I already specified that "Myocarditis, pericarditis, valvulitis, aseptic meningitis, pneumonitis, lymphadenitis, and hepatitis may be present and are manifested by the presence of inflammatory cells in the affected tissues" M aen K. A.  Talk  10:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

This seems tedious... and it is, actually. But we need in this section to establish the identity of KD among its 'peers', as much as possible. Rcej (Robert) - talk 03:53, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * What now?? are we done with that?? M aen K. A.  Talk  22:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Not yet :) We need to know where in the classification scheme of systemic vasculitis KD fits, specifying that KD is a medium sized arterial vasculitis and what criteria in systemic vasculitis determines the designation 'medium sized'. Also, KD is a primary childhood vasculitis. How does primary childhood vasculitis relate to 'medium sized' and systemic vasculitis? Here's two new sources, one has a link to a full text ver:, ; also, you may want to revisit two you're already using, , . Seems like a lot still, but we'll be ready to move on eventually ;D Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You know I cant exactly know what you want me to do, can you please help with completing the section?? I mean I cant find a way to state "what criteria in systemic vasculitis determines the designation 'medium sized'" or "How does primary childhood vasculitis relate to 'medium sized' and systemic vasculitis" even though I red the two resources you provide and many more!!,sorry for that. more than that, I believe that the section is ok now and if you check any Kawasaki review you will not find a wider classification section, that is if you find that section which is rarely referred to, and actually this is making the process harder  M aen K. A.  Talk  16:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I will finish up the section ASAP :) hmm... give me a couple days to figure out what we need to focus on next! Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be great, thank you, and take your time :-) M aen K. A.  Talk  18:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Tables
Please check the tables at the diagnosis and the symptoms sections, and give me an opinion M aen K. A.  Talk  14:28, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The table 'less common manifestations' is nice! The ref used for the 'Criteria for diagnosis' table is a book; cite the page numbers too :) I would rather not have a 'Differential diagnosis' table; we will likely require a Differential diagnosis subsection in Diagnosis. That would have to tell us how the diagnosis of KD is reached when another specified disorder is suspected. Rcej (Robert) - talk 06:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have removed the Differential diagnosis table M aen K. A.  Talk  15:57, 17 April 2010 (UTC)