Talk:Auditory processing disorder/Archives/2010/June

potential Conflict of Interest DJM77bci

A certain user DJM77bci <REDACTED> appears to be promoting his minority views regarding APD, and those of his research partner <REDACTED>

Hopefully DJM77bci will try to maintain the balanced and neutral requirements that WIKI expect regarding contributions to articles in future.

dolfrog (talk) 09:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a trifle late now, but you should have been warned at this stage about WP:OUTING: outing of other editors' real-world identities is a breach of Wikipedia's harassment policy. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 04:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Please note that I have referenced my points with citations to peer-reviewed journals, which is more than can be said for most of what is in this article! How is this a conflict of interest? Is your idea of balanced presentation to just delete anything you don’t agree with?

your views are a very minority view regarding APD as described in the Article describing your position by Jack Katz. Your position is a minority postion in one of many countries researching APD which makes your postion even less supported by your fellow professionals. you are using this article to promte your minority view, and failing to provide a balance by failing to provide a similarly detailed arguement for the opposing majority view. You would appear to represent the rump of US audiologists who oppose the progess made since the 2000 Bruton conference and have little or no regard from research carried out outside of the USA.

My position is clear I have been a editor of the is article on and off for many years, and i do not have the time to keep regualr observation of the change in content, and yes the page does require a complete overhaul. I am the founder of APDUK, which is recognised by the UK government agencies to be the main support orgnaisation for those who have APD in the UK, I run the UK APD national helpline, and I own the Old APD forum for adult APDs which has been running since 2000. I have a 2 diagnosis of APD one from the USA and one from the UK, my three sons have APD, and my wife was diagnosed as having APD last year.

My main aim is to increase the awarenes of APD, based on the best research avai;able whih you seem to want to ignore for your own reasons which are not in the best interest of those who may have APD.

If you persist in reposting your biased contributions then this matter will be referred to the WIKI administrators.

dolfrog (talk) 23:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

How do you know that my position is a minority position? Do you have any references from peer-reviewed journals to support this proposition? The article you cite from Katz was an invited commentary to the target article written by Tony Cacace and myself. We also responded to Dr. Katz’s comments. Citing one side of a debate is hardly a balanced approach. In fact, the numerous references that I included (and I could include more) in the material that you just simply deleted attest to the fact that there are professionals who publish in the peer-reviewed scientific literature who have concerns with many of these issues. This article makes numerous assertions for which citations in the peer-reviewed literature are not provided. To me, this appears to be very biased.

If I were to plug the book on “Controversies in Auditory Processing Disorders” that Tony and I just published perhaps it could be construed as a conflict of interest as I can make a profit from this. But I did not, and otherwise I do not make any income from APDs. Do you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJM77bci (talk • contribs) 00:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

If you believe that you are increasing awareness of APD based on the best research available then by all means, please provide some citations from the peer-reviewed literature. You may notice that I keep brining up this issue of peer-reviewed literature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJM77bci (talk • contribs) 00:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I founded and run in my own time a nonprift organisation Auditory Processing Disorder in the UK (APDUK) which is advised by the UK APD sterring committee, and the UK Medical Reserarch Council, we have also co-operated with researchers from Australia. The UK Medical Research Council's Institute of Hearing Research defines all Auditory conditions for the UK, much like ASHA in the USA. In the UK we have been researching Sound Frequency based APD diagnostic tests which will be a univsersal battery of APD diagnostic tests, as opposed to the existing language based APD tests which lack universality. many of the peer reviewed paper which have result from the UK APD research program can be founs on the MRCweb sitr at http://www.ihr.mrc.ac.uk/research/apd.php/apd.php?page=apd_docs the home page for the APD section of the MRC web site is at http://www.ihr.mrc.ac.uk/research/apd.php/

If you will begin to add more balanced contributions to the article i will leave them but if not then I will seek a banning order.

Currently oi do not have time to revise this article, as I am currently editing the Dyslexia aarticle, while alos running APDUK. But editing this web article will be my next project. It has become a mess since i last edited it back in 2005 /2006

dolfrog (talk) 04:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

You might consider reading what the APD steering committee you mentioned has to say about the role of APD in other disorders. To quote their position statement “APD often co-exists with other sensory, cognitive, neurological or psychological difficulties/disorders, but we are not yet able to determine the precise nature of the relationship between them. APD may be causative or symptomatic or may result from a common underlying cause of an/other disorder/s. The difficulty in untangling these relationships adds to the difficulty of diagnosing APD.”

Yet you boldly state that “APD is recognized as a major cause of dyslexia” and cite a reference for this that never mentions the term (see my comments under Diagnosis).DJM77bci (talk) 01:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Am J Audiol. 2005 Dec;14(2):128-38; discussion 143-50. Nonmodularity of the central auditory nervous system: implications for (central) auditory processing disorder. by Musiek FE, Bellis TJ, Chermak GD. University of Connecticut, Storrs 06269-1085, USA. frank.musiek@uconn.edu Comment on:* Am J Audiol. 2005 Dec;14(2):112-23. This response to A. T. Cacace and D. J. McFarland (2005) identifies points of agreement and disagreement regarding the concept of modularity in the diagnosis of (central) auditory processing disorder [(C)APD 80.47.27.41 (talk) 15:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

New revision project

Hi All

I thoguth it would be useful to use the facilities of the Dyslexia project to discuss the radical changes that this articles requires. So i have created an copy of the current version of Auditory Processing Disorder article as part of the Wiki Dyslexia project.Wikipedia:WikiProject Dyslexia/Auditory Processing Disorder So we can try out various editing options without making the curent article any worse. On the talk page i have crerated a section to add new references so we can put the referecnes to best use to support the content of the article.

See you at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dyslexia/Auditory Processing Disorder

dolfrog (talk) 01:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. Such discussion is what this here Talk page is for, and the usual Wikipedia process is to edit in situ. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 09:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)