User talk:Kristiedelvalle/sandbox

All my comments are in bold

Article: Healthcare in Costa Rica
'''Where in the article do you want to add this section? Would it go at the very end?'''

Reformed Healthcare Litigation The development of the current public and private healthcare system in Costa Rica and its movement towards a progressive system came about as a response to a growing constitutional health rights in Costa Rica. The Supreme Court (the Sala IV) released litigations for medications, treatments, and other health care issues. Criticism from inside the health system regarding “the court’s jurisprudence elevated the right to health above financial considerations, and as a result posed a threat to the financial well-being of the state-run health care system." [1] To address these criticisms, the Sala IV partnered with the Cochrane Collaboration to integrate medical professional evaluations in its decision-making process for claims seeking access to medication. I think it might be better to paraphrase the quote you included above, maybe something like: The court values the right to health above health care costs, which may threaten the financial health of the state-run health care system.

A 2014 study researched successful health rights litigation and showed that I would write out 'greater than 70%' >70% of favorable rulings were for low-priority medications in Costa Rica, revealing an unfair access to medications. '''Does it say 'unfair' in the study? I just want to make sure you remain a neutral tone.''' Then a study was conducted researching the court’s reformed ruling process and whether it has changed in favor of the health rights conversation. It revealed that the probability of winning a medication lawsuit has increased drastically over time. The percent of rulings granting experimental medications has declined while the percent granting high-priority medications increased. Based on these results, in comparison to the court’s pre-reform process, the reformed new process has led to some minor gains in fairness.[1]

'''The last 3 sentences read a little like an essay. I think you could shorten them and maybe : A 2014 study regarding the court's reformed ruling process found that the percent of rulings granting experimental medications has declined while the percent granting high-priority medications increased, indicating...  It seems like some types of rulings have declined in percentage while others have increased, so I'm not sure it makes send to generalize that 'the probability of winning a medication lawsuit has increased drastically over time' but I may be misunderstanding this.''' It seems a little biased to say that the reformed process has increased fairness unless it's said explicitly in the study — then it might be a good idea to quote it.

Article: Mobile Clinics
Mobile Clinics Before foreign aid orgs or the state government were involved in healthcare, Costa Rica's inhabitants managed their own health care, and before biomedicine was even introduced, people relied on various socio cultural adaptations to prevent illnesses, such as personal hygiene and settlement patterns.[2]This might be a good place to introduce what mobile clinics are and how they're used before jumping into the study, especially because there's not a separate Wikipedia article about mobile clinics you can hyperlink to A study done in rural Namibia, I feel like you could just start the sentence as In [insert year], researchers in rural Namibia... researchers observed the health changes of orphans and vulnerable children as well as non-vulnerable children visiting a mobile clinic in rural Namibia where health facilities are far from the remote villages. Over 6 months, information on immunization status, diagnosis of anemia, skin and intestinal disorders, nutrition, dental disorders and referral was collected and showed that regular mobile clinic visits improved the health indices of child attendees. maybe change to active voice: "Over 6 months, they collected..." The study concluded that “careful planning of these [mobile clinic] programs in areas with similarly identified barriers may help correct the health disparities among Namibian [orphans and other vulnerable children] OVC and could be a first step in improving child morbidity and mortality in difficult-to-reach rural areas.[3]

Again, since the last sentence is a fairly long quote, it might make more sense to paraphrase it.

'''Overall, I think both additions are really well thought-out and would add a lot of important detail to the Wiki article. I like how you described specific studies that led to important results. Great job!!!'''

Sabina Mahavni (talk) 16:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Sabina Mahavni