User:Saavhispurkinjefiber/sandbox

Welcome to your sandbox!

Link to Project Resource Page
Project Homepage and Resources

Practice Editing Here (Nov 23rd in-class Wiki session work)

 * This is a place to practice clicking the "edit" button and practice adding references (via the citation button).
 * Article Name: Specific Phobia

Assignment # 3

 * Note: You will be emailing your assignment # 3 directly to your tutor, however, please paste a version here that excludes your personal information. This will allow us to support your efforts on Wikipedia prior to editing "live" in the article.

Anonymous Version Of Assignment #3

1| Proposed Changes
Change I

We propose to remove the four bulleted points under the sentence "Main features of diagnostic criteria for specific phobia in the DSM-IV-TR."Saavhispurkinjefiber (talk) 17:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)saavhispurkinjefiber

Change 2

We propose to change the word "fourth" to "fifth" in the sentence "according to the fourth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, phobias can be classified under the following general categories." under the subheading "Types" Saavhispurkinjefiber (talk) 17:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)saavhispurkinjefiber

Change 3

We propose to change "fear of dogs, cats, rats and/or mice, pigs, cows, birds, spiders, or snakes" to "fear of spiders, insects, dogs" Under the subheading "Types"  Saavhispurkinjefiber (talk) 17:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)saavhispurkinjefiber

Change 4

Under the subheading "Types" we propose to capitalize the first letter of each word following the dash that precedes the general category of specific phobia type. Saavhispurkinjefiber (talk) 17:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)saavhispurkinjefiber

2| Rationale
Change I

This change is necessary, as the content no longer reflects current practice guidelines and is redundant. The information being replaced is inadequate because it originates from the DSM-IV-TR which has been since replaced in practice with the DSM-V. This change will help readers view only the most up-to-date information without confusion as to which manual (DSM-IV-TR or DSM-V) should be referenced.

Change 2

This change is necessary, as if it were to not occur, the subtypes listed would be referenced to an out-of-date (and thereby inadequate) source (DSM-IV-TR). The information source is the DSM-V, and the subsequent descriptions of the types of specific phobia are all referenced from this source.

Change 3

This change is necessary as the list of existing examples may be slightly redundant, and the omission of “cats, rats and/or mice, pigs, cows, and birds, and the addition of dogs” will better reflect the examples provided in the DSM-V. This information was sourced from the DSM-V. Additionally, this change must be implemented if proposed change (2) occurs, as the reference would be otherwise incorrect since the DSM-IV content would have been omitted.

Change 4

This is a minor edit, made for the purposes of consistency and clarity.

3| Area of Controversy
Since the DSM-V is regarded to be the Gold-Standard for diagnosis of specific phobia in North America, controversy is unlikely within this geographical region. Furthermore, although the DSM-V is used widely internationally, there are regions in which its diagnostic criteria are not unanimously utilized. As such, there may be discrepancies in specific criteria for the diagnosis of specific phobia, yet since all changes were made between DSM-IV-TR, and DSM-V content, it is unlikely that novel ambiguity or controversy will arise.

4| Critique of Source
Although the DSM-V is considered to be the Gold Standard for psychiatric disorder diagnosis and classification, it is not devoid of controversy. Concerns outlined in the article DSM revision surrounded by controversy published in the CMAJ center around a lack of transparency with the revision process. This lack of transparency was initially sparked by a confidentiality agreement that contributors were required to sign. The purpose of this agreement was stated to protect intellectual property while simultaneously protecting task force members from fear of misinterpretation of input from individuals outside of the DSM-revision professional realm. Although well-intended, individuals have raised concerns about the lack of openness regarding methods and timelines among other factors.

Despite this controversy, the DSM-V remains the accepted standard in many countries, and the contributions of over 150 experts from 16 countries aid in circumventing potential deleterious impacts from these concerns.

Collier R. (2010). DSM revision surrounded by controversy. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 182(1), 16–17. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-3108

5| Article Improvement
Proposed improvements are shared on article’s talk page.

Additional Citations
Anxiety Disorders. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.dsm05

What to post on the Wikipedia article talk page?

 * This will also be covered on Nov 23rd in class. Your group should use the below template to share an outline of your proposed improvements (including your new wording and citations). Article talk pages are not places to share your assignment answers. The Wikipedia community will be more interested in viewing your exact article improvement suggestions including where you plan to improve the article (which section), what wording you suggest, and the exact citation (Note: all citations must meet WP:MEDRS)
 * You will not be able to paste citations directly from your sandbox to talk pages (unless you are interested in editing/learning Wiki-code in the "source editing" mode). We suggest re-adding your citations on the talk page manually (using the cite button and populating the citation by pasting in the DOI, website, or PMID). You will have to repeat this process yet again when you edit the actual article live.
 * Talk Page Template: CARL Medical Editing Initiative/Fall 2020/Talk Page Template