User:Eugeniegiraldeau/sandbox

Comorbidity
Oppositional Defiant Disorder can be described as a term or disorder with lots of different pathways in regard to comorbidity. A high importance must be given to the representation of ODD as a distinct psychiatric disorder independent of construct disorder since people seem to mix or bind those two different disorders together.

In the context of oppositional defiant disorder and comorbidity with other disorders, researchers often conclude that ODD co-occurs with an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), anxiety disorders, emotional disorders as well as mood disorders. Those mood disorders can be linked to major depression or bipolar disorder. Indirect consequences of ODD can also be related or associated with a later mental disorder. For instance, conduct disorder is often studied in connection with ODD. A strong comorbidity can be observed within those two disorders but an even higher connection with ADHD in relations to ODD can be seen. For instance, children or adolescents who have ODD with coexistence of ADHD will usually be more aggressive, will have more of the negative behavioral symptoms of ODD and thus, inhibit them from having a successful academic life. This will be reflected in their academic path as students.

Other conditions that can be predicted in children or people with ODD are learning disorders in which the person has significant impairments in regard to the academic area and language disorders in which problems can be observed related to language production and/or comprehension.

Prognosis
Oppositional defiant disorder is not a disorder that everybody outgrows of by adulthood. For instance, many people with ODD will still experience many symptoms related to this disorder during adulthood while others will experience less of those symptoms. It has been proven that this disorder can be related to symptoms improvements in the later years. However, treatments must be taken into consideration for improvements. In fact, 67% of children with ODD, with the use of treatment, will experience less or fewer symptoms regarding their specific disorder.

Article Evaluation

·       '''Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?'''

I believe that what is written in the article of Oppositional Defiant Disorder is actually relevant to the article topic. To be more precise, the contents mentioned in this article are specific ones that help the reader gain a sense or feeling of what is the actual oppositional defiant disorder. Something that distracted me was how it was mentioned that this specific disorder was not like another disorder named conduct disorder. This description that followed right after this fact was not really mentioning what the oppositional defiant disorder was, but was mentioning what it was not.

·       '''Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?'''

I think that this article has a fairly neutral tone. In fact, it is possible to observe a more negative description in some paragraphs such as in the paragraphs about genetic influences and prenatal factors. However, we understand, as readers, that the written does not mentioned his particular position about the actual term, he is only describing the more "negative" aspects of it.

·       Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

Most of the viewpoints are short except the "Causes" viewpoint. However, those short viewpoints are mostly well described and easy to read. I do not think that they are overrepresented but some of them such as the epidemiology, the diagnosis and the history of oppositional defiant disorder could have been a bit more explained and detailed.

·       '''Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?'''

Most of the citations are well done and work or support what is written in the article about this specific fact. However, it is possible to observe that some citations are needed in this article. For instance, it is written in blue and italic that some citations are missing. In fact, a few "medical citation needed" or "citation needed" are mentioned in the text in different places. Moreover, one particular reference or link does not seem to work and is related to the diagnosis of oppositional defiant disorder. This reference is also the only one in this particular viewpoint, which can be hard for us reader to see if this information about diagnosis is biased.

·       '''Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?'''

Many of the references seem to be from manuals, books and studies that are reliable (except one). The information comes from either encyclopedia or researchers on the specific subject. The DSM-5 is also greatly used as references in the article.

·       '''Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?'''

When entering on the page, it is possible to observe a big rectangle mentioning the multiple issues that this article has. For instance, it is mentioned that this article needs to be updated since the last update was on January 2015. Something that could be added in the article would be more information about the actual symptoms and how they can be observed in different settings or environments such as at school, at home, etc. Adding a viewpoint on the prevalence of oppositional defiant disorder as well as pharmacological treatments that can be used could also be a great idea and would add more depth to the article.

·       '''Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?'''

The conversations in the talk page seem to be related to, first, the criticism aspect of the article and how people tend to attack or criticize the people who are writing the article since they "do not have a kid with ODD" so they could not know those facts written in the article. Another part of the conversation (between two persons) talks about how the writers (students) did not seem to understand clearly how to locate and rephrase appropriate sources (lack of page numbers). This is a great example on how people cooperate with each other to create a more perfect and high-quality article.

·       '''How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?'''

·       How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

We have not seen this topic in class for now.