Jump to content

Talk:Childhood dementia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the Management / Treatment section

[edit]

According to Childhood Dementia: A Collective Clinical Approach to Advance Therapeutic Development and Care, which I used in the draft:

"(...) less than 5% of the conditions having disease-modifying therapies, (...)".

From my understanding this should be the percentage of the conditions that are currently treatable.

With that in mind, I chose a Management section instead of Treatment for now. But should both be included? Or should treatable and untreatable Childhood dementia be made into subtopics / child articles? Or should a different solution be taken?

Let me know your thoughts! Irina Rainbow (talk) 20:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About my removal of the sentence in History

[edit]

@Ozzie10aaaa

I removed this sentence as it seemed incorrect, but the source may still be useful (it just seems it was misinterpreted in the sentence).

Feel free to work on 'History' though! Just make sure what you add meets WP:Verifiability! Irina Rainbow (talk) 17:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok, no problem, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the position of 'Prognosis'

[edit]

Hey @Ozzie10aaaa, I noticed you moved the Prognosis section back down.

You mentioned the medical manual of style, just as I did, which does list Prognosis beneath Treatment.

However, you may have missed this sentence from the MOS:

"If a disease is incurable, then the Prognosis section can be moved up, and a section called Management is more appropriate than Treatment."


From the sources, it seems only a relatively small amount of conditions considered part of Childhood Dementia are treatable.

Due to this, I think Prognosis should be the first section, especially as Childhood Dementia is a devastating group of diseases with very significant impacts on both life expectancy and quality.

I feel this is the most consequential aspect of the group, and so, also the first thing the article should give to the reader (after the lead ofc).

I'd like to hear your thoughts (and anyone else reading this), so we can hopefully all reach a consensus that's best for the article. Irina Rainbow (talk) 18:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

there are many diseases/disorders that unfortunately have a poor prognosis however (again ) per MEDMOS[1] it is best kept after 'treatment',Ozzie--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
p.s:
I searched the current sources using the keyword 'treat'. I'm compiling here what I could find that mentions the treatable conditions, which does seem to show they're a small portion of the total:
1)
The collective burden of childhood dementia: a scoping review:
"Of these, 25 were analysed separately as treatable conditions."
2) Childhooddementia.org:
"There are also more than 25 treatable disorders with close to normal life expectancy assuming early diagnosis and stringent treatment not listed here."
Note: This appears to be sourced from the scoping review
3) The Conversation:
"Childhood dementia treatments currently under evaluation or approved are for a very limited number of disorders, and are only available in some parts of the world."
Irina Rainbow (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
you should always use MEDRS Wikipedia:Why MEDRS?--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]