This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Oxygen therapy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 28 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Oxygen therapy.
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 October 2021 and 19 November 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Alex Nhan. Peer reviewers:
Alin538.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 05:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
In the field while using an oxygen delivery system one can not always rely on what the gadge relays. There are several things to keep in mind while using this equipement. You need to know the remainding volume is, calculate this with residual (500 lt.)and tank size. An equation is used to develope a measurement for remainding time.
(tank size)= metered reading - residaul x litres per minute at (? x 1.56) M-tank = time left
For the M ,D. E tanks what are the recognized equations to determin the tome left on that specific tank?
My name is Dan and I can be reached at ontariofirstaidworld.com or ontariofirstaid@gmail.com
I noticed that my reference clean up edits were reverted by RexxS. Given that there are several citations already using the vanc parameters I fail to see where the data granularity is being preserved by the status quo. The reference section is a mess with cite templates full of url linkrot parameters which we don't really need given the doi and pmid numbers are present. The deadlink raw url ref (that I replaced with a pmid cite) is basically useless, so are we are saying that we are not going to improve articles for the sake of data granularity? Should we be downgrading those vauthor parameters currently in the article to preserve data granularity? CV9933 ( talk) 15:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
|last1=Chu |first1=DK |last2=Kim |first2=LH |last3=Young |first3=PJ |last4=Zamiri |first4=N |last5=Almenawer |first5=SA |last6=Jaeschke |first6=R |last7=Szczeklik |first7=W |last8=Schünemann |first8=HJ |last9=Neary |first9=JD |last10=Alhazzani |first10=W
|vauthors = Chu DK, Kim LH, Young PJ, Zamiri N, Almenawer SA, Jaeschke R, Szczeklik W, Schünemann HJ, Neary JD, Alhazzani W
url=
http://cochranelibrary-wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001744.pub2/full
improve the article? Are you contending that the Cochrane Library urls are prone to linkrot? The doi was still there anyway, but did capitalising cd001744
improve the article? Not one jot; it was just busywork.date=4 September 2010
to date=September 2010
improve the article? Was putting the pmid parameter before the pmc parameter an improvement?journal=Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine
to journal = Undersea Hyperb Med
? Are you going to defend that as an improvement? Did you know there's a bot that goes around replacing the shortened journal names with the full ones? Now we know why there's so much work for it.url=
http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/4010
(and its archive-url) from the Smerz reference. The
Rubicon Research Repository has the full text version, while your so-called "CS1 maint - template details and linkrot" left the article with just a link to an abstract.Surname1, Givenname1; Surname2, Givenname2;
etc. – but an editor has added a reference in another, such as Vancouver-style (which displays authors as Surname1 Givenname1, Surname2 Givenname2,
etc.) This article used the common style on Wikipedia and you can see that of the 50+ references, all but 5 of them have the authors separated by semicolons and the <last first> separated by commas. Under those circumstances, it is not right to add references in Vancouver-style (such as vauthors) as it breaches
WP:CITEVAR. no matter how much you personally like the style.|date=
parameter, which need to be fixed manually, but that's small problem compared to the improvements it makes.Hello all, I am a 4th year medical student enrolled in the UCF WikiProject Medicine course, and I am planning on pursuing a career in anesthesiology. As part of a school course I will try to contribute to this Wikipedia article over the course of the next 4 weeks. In particular, I am planning on:
General:
- Edits/rearrangement to the article for grammar, flow, and succinctness.
- Add a section regarding physiological effects of oxygen supplementation, with appropriate references
- Embed associated links to other Wikipedia articles to my snippet
- Reorganize the "Side Effects" section in a way that provides more structure to the overall article, and depending on the overlap with physiological effects condense them into a single section
- Double-check article/references for out-of-date information/linkrot, contribute more detail to particular sections when I feel detail is lacking
- Add subsections to portions of the article where I feel it would benefit from additional structuring, e.g., "Delivery"
- Avoid medical jargon when sensible
- Add a graphic/figure to the article.
If I am doing anything negatively impacting the article please let me know; I would be happy to make the appropriate change(s) and I am open to feedback.
Alex Nhan ( talk) 14:34, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello Alex Nahn, this is Alex Lin here to peer review your great work thus far.
Couple suggestions:
1. Could benefits from some changes to the chronic conditions/contraindications/AEs
- consider adding a heading to chronic condition above the area where you suggest careful titration - add bullets for clarity - add a lead in sentence for AE's which differentiates it from contraindications
2. Physiologic effects
- could benefit from clarifying what type of physiologic effects in the header
3. Consider detailing FiO2 earlier on than in delivery
- this could help clarify a commonly confusing terminology b/w FiO2, different oxygen saturations
4. Rename "As a drug delivery route" - aesthetically dissimilar from other headings
Thank you for your time.
Strong Work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alin538 ( talk • contribs) 04:38, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey Alex, thank you for your suggestions. I have detailed changes I have made: Suggestion 1:
- Chronic conditions was a previously existing title which the paragraph falls under; I do not feel an additional header may be needed at this point in time. - Thank you for adding bullets - A lead-in sentence has been added per your recommendation
Suggestion 2:
- I have no clear system to arrange the variety of physiologic effects so they are listed alphabetically. Not all of the physiological effects are pathological, and sometimes they affect the same system in different ways. I feel like increasing the categories of effects will add to article clutter.
Suggestion 3:
- FiO2 is now described earlier in the article with an accompanying definition.
Suggestion 4:
- Good catch! The heading has been changed to 'Drug Delivery'.
Thanks! Alex Nhan ( talk) 14:01, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Oxygen therapy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 28 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Oxygen therapy.
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 October 2021 and 19 November 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Alex Nhan. Peer reviewers:
Alin538.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 05:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
In the field while using an oxygen delivery system one can not always rely on what the gadge relays. There are several things to keep in mind while using this equipement. You need to know the remainding volume is, calculate this with residual (500 lt.)and tank size. An equation is used to develope a measurement for remainding time.
(tank size)= metered reading - residaul x litres per minute at (? x 1.56) M-tank = time left
For the M ,D. E tanks what are the recognized equations to determin the tome left on that specific tank?
My name is Dan and I can be reached at ontariofirstaidworld.com or ontariofirstaid@gmail.com
I noticed that my reference clean up edits were reverted by RexxS. Given that there are several citations already using the vanc parameters I fail to see where the data granularity is being preserved by the status quo. The reference section is a mess with cite templates full of url linkrot parameters which we don't really need given the doi and pmid numbers are present. The deadlink raw url ref (that I replaced with a pmid cite) is basically useless, so are we are saying that we are not going to improve articles for the sake of data granularity? Should we be downgrading those vauthor parameters currently in the article to preserve data granularity? CV9933 ( talk) 15:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
|last1=Chu |first1=DK |last2=Kim |first2=LH |last3=Young |first3=PJ |last4=Zamiri |first4=N |last5=Almenawer |first5=SA |last6=Jaeschke |first6=R |last7=Szczeklik |first7=W |last8=Schünemann |first8=HJ |last9=Neary |first9=JD |last10=Alhazzani |first10=W
|vauthors = Chu DK, Kim LH, Young PJ, Zamiri N, Almenawer SA, Jaeschke R, Szczeklik W, Schünemann HJ, Neary JD, Alhazzani W
url=
http://cochranelibrary-wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001744.pub2/full
improve the article? Are you contending that the Cochrane Library urls are prone to linkrot? The doi was still there anyway, but did capitalising cd001744
improve the article? Not one jot; it was just busywork.date=4 September 2010
to date=September 2010
improve the article? Was putting the pmid parameter before the pmc parameter an improvement?journal=Undersea and Hyperbaric Medicine
to journal = Undersea Hyperb Med
? Are you going to defend that as an improvement? Did you know there's a bot that goes around replacing the shortened journal names with the full ones? Now we know why there's so much work for it.url=
http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/4010
(and its archive-url) from the Smerz reference. The
Rubicon Research Repository has the full text version, while your so-called "CS1 maint - template details and linkrot" left the article with just a link to an abstract.Surname1, Givenname1; Surname2, Givenname2;
etc. – but an editor has added a reference in another, such as Vancouver-style (which displays authors as Surname1 Givenname1, Surname2 Givenname2,
etc.) This article used the common style on Wikipedia and you can see that of the 50+ references, all but 5 of them have the authors separated by semicolons and the <last first> separated by commas. Under those circumstances, it is not right to add references in Vancouver-style (such as vauthors) as it breaches
WP:CITEVAR. no matter how much you personally like the style.|date=
parameter, which need to be fixed manually, but that's small problem compared to the improvements it makes.Hello all, I am a 4th year medical student enrolled in the UCF WikiProject Medicine course, and I am planning on pursuing a career in anesthesiology. As part of a school course I will try to contribute to this Wikipedia article over the course of the next 4 weeks. In particular, I am planning on:
General:
- Edits/rearrangement to the article for grammar, flow, and succinctness.
- Add a section regarding physiological effects of oxygen supplementation, with appropriate references
- Embed associated links to other Wikipedia articles to my snippet
- Reorganize the "Side Effects" section in a way that provides more structure to the overall article, and depending on the overlap with physiological effects condense them into a single section
- Double-check article/references for out-of-date information/linkrot, contribute more detail to particular sections when I feel detail is lacking
- Add subsections to portions of the article where I feel it would benefit from additional structuring, e.g., "Delivery"
- Avoid medical jargon when sensible
- Add a graphic/figure to the article.
If I am doing anything negatively impacting the article please let me know; I would be happy to make the appropriate change(s) and I am open to feedback.
Alex Nhan ( talk) 14:34, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello Alex Nahn, this is Alex Lin here to peer review your great work thus far.
Couple suggestions:
1. Could benefits from some changes to the chronic conditions/contraindications/AEs
- consider adding a heading to chronic condition above the area where you suggest careful titration - add bullets for clarity - add a lead in sentence for AE's which differentiates it from contraindications
2. Physiologic effects
- could benefit from clarifying what type of physiologic effects in the header
3. Consider detailing FiO2 earlier on than in delivery
- this could help clarify a commonly confusing terminology b/w FiO2, different oxygen saturations
4. Rename "As a drug delivery route" - aesthetically dissimilar from other headings
Thank you for your time.
Strong Work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alin538 ( talk • contribs) 04:38, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey Alex, thank you for your suggestions. I have detailed changes I have made: Suggestion 1:
- Chronic conditions was a previously existing title which the paragraph falls under; I do not feel an additional header may be needed at this point in time. - Thank you for adding bullets - A lead-in sentence has been added per your recommendation
Suggestion 2:
- I have no clear system to arrange the variety of physiologic effects so they are listed alphabetically. Not all of the physiological effects are pathological, and sometimes they affect the same system in different ways. I feel like increasing the categories of effects will add to article clutter.
Suggestion 3:
- FiO2 is now described earlier in the article with an accompanying definition.
Suggestion 4:
- Good catch! The heading has been changed to 'Drug Delivery'.
Thanks! Alex Nhan ( talk) 14:01, 17 November 2021 (UTC)