Talk:Tuberculoma

Wiki Education assignment: WikiProject Medicine Fall 2022 UCF COM

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 October 2022 and 18 November 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Djfayze (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Adventuregurl97.

— Assignment last updated by DrDexterN (talk) 20:10, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I'm a UCF COM 4th year medical student who is planning on expanding and improving this article on tuberculoma. Because the article does not have any headings or subheadings at this time, I will utilize the manual of style to insert appropriate and applicable sections to the article while adding relevant details to each section. Specific sections I plan to include at this time (based on availability of references) include:

-Signs and symptoms

-Causes

-Mechanism

-Diagnosis

-Treatment

-Prognosis

A preliminary search of Pubmed and available library resources gives the feeling that there is not an abundance of information on this topic. However, my goal is to focus on textbooks regarding tuberculosis, meta-analyses, and literature reviews. If I'm able to figure it out, I would also like to add an infobox, as it states above that one is needed. Additionally, I will attempt to locate appropriate media resources that are not copyright restricted to include in the article. Other overarching goals include maintaining neutrality, writing in language accessible to the average reader, and writing without close paraphrasing. Djfayze (talk) 18:42, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

What you have added so far looks good. Lalaithan (talk) 23:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review of Djfayze's Edits

Djfayze completed a thorough review of the page "tuberculoma" with the following feedback from peer review provided below:

Lead

- The lead has been updated to reflect the new content added

-The lead has an introductory sentence that describes the articles topic

-The lead is concise and not overly detailed without information that is not otherwise present in the article.

Content

- Content added is extensive and relative to the topic.

- The content added is all up to date.

- The epidemiology, mechanism, signs and symptoms, imaging, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis content are all extensively covered.

Tone

-The tone of the content added is neutral. There are no biased claims or over/underrepresented viewpoints.

-There is no attempt at persuasion in this topic.

References

-All content is well cited by a reliable secondary source of information.

-Content accurately reflects what the cited sources say.

-Sources are mostly current. There are some that are >5 years old. Consider revising for more current sources.

-Links work in the references section.

Organization:

-Content is concise and well written. No grammatical or spelling errors.

-Organization is consistent with Wiki recommended organization.

Images and Media:

-Images are accurate, depict images of tuberculomas and adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

-Images are laid out in a visually appealing way

Overall impressions:

This was a very well written article. The vast majority of this article was written and cited by Djfayze. The data is current, up to date, and well organized.

Comments for improvement:

There are some words that are in medical terminology that could have been linked to definitions to help the average reader. For example, in the epidemiology section: infratentorial vs supratentorial could be linked to pages that described what these are to the lay person.

Consider linking definitions to words in the mechanism section such as "bacteremia", "granulomatous inflammation", "caseous", "mycobacterium tuberculosis, "blood brain barrier", "cytokines" etc.

Apply this idea to the other sections.

It would be interesting to provide pictures of the CT vs MRI imaging pointing out the "target sign" that is pathognomonic.

Overall- fantastic job! Keep up the great work! Adventuregurl97 (talk) 01:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Euphemism

@Djfayze, can you explain why you reverted this copyedit? WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:58, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing the original wording "fail to recover" was medically correct and not in need of change. Djfayze (talk) 17:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@Djfayze, first of all, it's incorrect and unfair to speak of people as "failing" in a medical context. Treatments fail patients every minute of the day, but people don't fail the treatment. You may be accustomed to hearing thoughtless people claim that it's all the patient's fault if the treatment doesn't work for them, but if you think about it, it should be obvious that this isn't what's really happening. Don't blame the patients for "failing" when the real problem is ineffective treatment options.

Second, "fail to recover" is a lot broader than "die". The options aren't just cure or death; there is a lot of ground in between. People with Down syndrome, or spinal cord injuries, or type 1 diabetes, don't "recover", but they do live for decades. If the specific form of "failure to recover" for tuberculoma involves a funeral, then we need to say outright that these people die. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)