User talk:I.anastacia/sandbox

Peer Review
Hey, Inna!

I think your sections are great! They are informative, easy to read, and I think all important information has been covered. I just made a couple edits, mostly regarding punctuation. Here are a few suggestions:

Prognosis section:
 * What do you mean by using Botox? Botox injections to the tissues surrounding the VF? Maybe clarify this a bit.


 * “More than half of the pediatric patients studied who underwent hypnosis therapy saw either a reduction or resolution of VCD.” this sentence is awkward to me. Maybe “When pediatric patients undergoing hypnosis   therapy were studied, more than half saw either a reduction or resolution of VCD”, or something like that


 * Link Speech therapy to the Speech-language pathology page

Risk Factors section:


 * Great list of risk factors, but maybe explain why these put you at risk.

Other Factors section:


 * Maybe it’s just because I have not seen the entire article, but I can’t seem to understand what these are factors of. Are they prognostic factors? (in which case, they should be under the Prognosis heading)

GREAT job!! :) LisaMart86 (talk) 20:36, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Inna,

I'm not going to have much more to say. I think it's more valuable for me to expand on Lisa's thoughts, rather than repeating them.

I too think you've framed this topic really well, and the information is presented in an unbiased manner that is clear and concise.

First of all - is your team intending to transfer the page title to VFD, rather than VCD? You can do so using the "move" function on the edit page. My article too had the mistake of referencing vocal "cord", and it's a pretty easy switch.

Written feedback:

"The following increase an individual's chances for VCD" should this be "acquiring VCD" ?

In your list, insure all the items are in the same tense. Consider changing item three to "traumatic events that involve breathing".

Structural feedback:

I agree with Lisa's confusion with the "Other Factors" section. It seems like a collection of disconnected facts. I think partially, this is because you've used the word "Factors" again, which suggest a collection of cohesive items. Perhaps if you called the section "Additional Considerations" we'd be more receptive to the cluster of items in this section.

Great work :) It was a fun read. I learnded things! :) KevintheSLP (talk) 00:30, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both for the helpful feedback! You're right, even I felt like the "other factors" part was wishy-washy and didn't fit in. I've deleted the section and will talk with my teammates to see if that info fits more smoothly into another section. I.anastacia (talk) 15:07, 6 November 2016 (UTC)