User talk:Adriana gentile/sandbox

Peer Review
Hi Adriana!

I think that adding a section in on voice therapy in children is filling a huge gap of information that was missing from this article, so this is great! I think this section is also very well written, easy to follow and reflects the tone of wikipedia articles.

I have listed a few points to consider as you continue to draft your article: 1- In terms of prevalence, I am curious if there is a statistic out there that shows how many children participate in voice therapy. 2- I am uncertain of the amount of research out there on voice therapy in children, but it may be helpful to add another source of information in the assessment section as all the information is coming from one source. 3- It may be helpful to mention in the assessment who is the professional responsible for doing this type of assessment. Would the SLP take the lead? Also in point 3, who would perform the flexible endoscopy (SLP in the states and physician in Canada perhaps). VoiceDisordersKristine (talk) 20:23, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi!

I agree with you for the prevalence of children who are or have been enrolled in VT. I am still looking for a source that could specify this data for me. There isn't a lot of new research, but I am definitely in the process of gathering more sources discussing assessment procedures, so I will be able to supplement this section with varied citations soon. I was considering adding information about the professionals involved in assessment, but I havent found sources specific to this. I have found information detailing members on the voice-teams and I have added this in. Adriana gentile (talk) 22:49, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Your work here looks like it's coming along well! It maintains a neutral tone and presents relevant information for each sub-section. Here are a couple things I think could be reviewed or edited:
 * There could be a link from the word "dysphonia" to the page for hoarse voice/dysphonia in the beginning of your section.
 * Under physical examination, it could be helpful to the reader to either add a bit more information, or link to the page for "endoscopy".
 * Perhaps you could add a short description of Resonance Therapy in that item to clarify what it consists of.
 * In terms of citations, I noticed that sometimes you cite the same sources in many sentences of a single paragraph. I wonder if it's okay to cite it only once or twice within that paragraph since the information comes from the same place? (I did something similar on my draft and am not sure what the guideline is.)
 * There are some small issues in formatting: on other wiki pages I've looked at, the bracketed number linking to the reference goes after the period at the end of a sentence, and then there's a space before the next sentence. Also, when you list things in parentheses, in a couple places there's a comma missing before "etc." — Evans310 (talk) 22:12, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for your feedback. I agree with a lot of the comments you made. I've gone over the section and have fixed the formatting of my citations and added links wherever I could. I agree about your comment on RVT, I will try and add a brief description of the therapy as well. Adriana gentile (talk) 17:16, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer review - Alex
Hi Adriana! I think that your section adds a lot to your article and you were able to summarize a lot of information in a way that would be mostly clear to someone with no SLP knowledge. I really liked how you subdivided your text. This helps the reader make sense of the information. I also liked how you used multiple examples to help differentiate the diagnoses.There are a few terms that you mentioned that ("VT", "MPT, jitter, s/z ratios", "Flow phonation therapy, straw phonation and lip buzzes") that may need more description if you think it would be relevant to add. Be careful to correct "various different types" and "can involves a". In your interview section, I wondered if any of your articles talked about hearing (leading to more shouting for some children), and if they thought it was pertinent. I was also wondering if there was more information on which therapy types are used for which condition, since you were able to find that information in regards to treatment of nodules. Lastly, I wondered, out of personal curiosity, if your research mentioned anything about children with voice disorders due to HPV, since I had seen this on a placement. Overall, you used a neutral tone throughout and your sources seem to be relevant and trustworthy. I think you went above and beyond what was expected and you were able to add very pertinent and complete information to your article. I feel like I learned a lot and I look forward to reading more about voice therapy in children. Alex BM (talk) 00:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Alex! Thanks for your feedback! I agree with you that there are a number of terms throughout the article that merit further explanation. Ideally I would have liked to link to other articles that explain these things in more depth, however as far as I can tell, no such articles exist. I could include brief explanations of each, however I worry of what that would mean for the length of this section and whether it may be going into too much detail, since the purpose of this is really to give a brief overview of an otherwise very broad topic. I will look into this with our professor and see what the best option would be. As for your mention of the relevance of hearing impairment and HPV, I definitely think that would be relevant to add and I will look for information about it! Similarly, I will try and find therapies that are specific to different voice conditions, however I have not come across this in my research so far (aside from vocal nodule treatment specifically).If I do, I will be sure to include it. Adriana gentile (talk) 17:16, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Feedback from Nicole
Hi Adriana

Nice job! The pediatric voice section is a huge topic on its own and I admired you to take on this lead. It certainly exceeded my expectation. Overall, the paragraph is well written. You may also realize that there are not much solid research/ review reports on this topic. I have one particular suggestion re the entry of "Endocrine pathology induced VT". It seems that "VT" isn't defined in the article and also a citation is missing. You may want to remove this entry if no solid evidence is available for it.

Nicole