User talk:Reidh084/sandbox

Katherine's peer review
I think you added some very relevant information to the wikipedia page, where you filled gaps initially present in the page. I especially enjoyed your prevention section since you addressed many different domains where prevention would be required. I also have a few suggestions related to your additions:

In your screening section, I would suggest making the sentence "and so diagnosis from your doctor is recommended" slightly more formal. A suggestion could be changing it to "where it is recommended to obtain a diagnosis from a doctor". I would also suggest making the screening section a "screening and identification" section since it appears as if you include information relating to both of these topics.

In the treatment section, I would suggest making the sentence "as the masses of granular tissue are most often benign, prognosis is generally good" slightly more formal. For example, writing "...prognosis is generally positive". Also in the treatment section, I was slightly confused that surgery is not recommended (even if there is recurrence). Does voice therapy from an S-LP shrink the tissue masses? If not, how is voice therapy effective alone when the masses remain?

One element I would suggest adding is the hyperlink for the in-text citations (instead of writing the number in parentheses, add the "cite" link at the end of the sentence you want to reference). Also, since you initially reference three articles, I was wondering if you ended up using information (even if it was the same as source 3) from the other two articles in your additions? If so, I would suggest adding the references for all relevant articles at the end of the corresponding sentences.

I also corrected some (one) spelling errors directly in your sandbox.

Great work so far!

Khaen23 (talk) 04:26, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

thanks Katherine! I made some of the changes you suggested and also added some more detail. I noticed a small glitch with the citations that I was able to fix too. Would you mind looking over the article again with some of those changes made? As for the surgical treatment, one of the other group members will be detailing the decision-making process when considering treatments, however vocal hygiene and voice treatment are the gold standard as of now.Reidh084 (talk) 12:27, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Ishi's Peer Review
Hi Reidh084! Great job on the sections that you have written out. You have especially done well on managing to keep the terminology simple and explaining that which is more technical. The suggestions that I have are: 1) Give a few examples of vocal hygiene techniques when you mention it in the prevention section/ hyperlink it if a topic like that is available on Wikipedia 2) In the last sentence of the prevention section, perhaps you could rephrase "doctors should...." since that is not an entirely neutral view (what doctors should and should not do)

Other than that, I agree with Katherine's comments. Happy editing! 00:41, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments Ishi! I'll see what I can do to incorporate a few more details and address the sentence you mentioned. thanks!Reidh084 (talk) 17:32, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Peer review - Alex
Hi there! I think you did a wonderful job summarizing your ideas in a clear and concise way that would be understood by someone who has no prior SLP knowledge. Your paragraphs are well organized which makes it an easy read. I would maybe add links to "laryngoscopy" and "differential diagnosis" if they exist. It may also be pertinent to add examples to voice hygiene since it isn't a term commonly used. I wonder if the article you cited for your symptoms (2) mentioned other terms used by patients to describe their voice. I don't remember any patients using "huskiness" and I just wonder if there might be a cultural factor. I might also add "and" before "concurrent use of the voice with alcohol" to make the sentence flow a little better, but that's a minor change. Overall, your tone was very neutral and I think you chose very good sources. It was very well written and I feel like I've learned a lot from just three paragraphs! Alex BM (talk) 00:56, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Feedback from Nicole
Hi Heather

Excellent job. Your contribution to this article beyond my expectation. Your sections are well referenced as well. You're also very responsive to your peer's comments.

Nicole