General Feedback´ about covid-19-anki-deck HOT 11 CLOSED

Great. Thanks for your contribution, and welcome to the team!

from covid-19-anki-deck.

Let me also start by thanking you for all your feedback! I'll take it point by point:

1. context — I agree, will do in the next few days
2. definition — another simple way it could work is to just add "(definition)" to the front of the card, no? I also like using javascript, and that could easily solve it via a "definition" tag and displaying that as an icon / text, etc.
3. "The reason we are ..." — how about "The main reason not everyone suspected* can be tested for COVID-19 in most countries

• either with (even mild) symptoms, or identified as high probability through contact tracing"

4. "Information that's impossible to know" — I wonder if the difference is on how we define "impossible". I use it to mean "even if we had all the resources and methods at our disposal", a sort of synonym of "logically impossible" (say, apart from a good prediction), because the events we care about (the deaths) have yet to happen. If so, I could define "impossible" with an asterisk as used above. Otherwise, what other information is impossible (in this sense) to know?
   (I'll continue this in a few hours.)

from covid-19-anki-deck.

5. Tuberculosis — the challenge here is that there defining it as, say, a "bacterial infection of the lungs" doesn't suffice, because there are others that we don't call tuberculosis, so the definition is incomplete. So, at least in my mind, the definition needs to contain the name of the bacteria, which constrains the infection to being precisely TBC. Also, there already exists another note asking which bacteria cause TBC (search for "Bacteria that cause tuberculosis")
6. "Information that we don't know due to limited resources" — this series of cards is trying to explain, in as plain language as possible, why one cannot rely on the official numbers to assess the spread, or the mortality of the disease. If you search for "Official numbers not reflecting the ongoing reality of the COVID-19 spread" (in the context field), I hope all the notes together are starting to make sense as a whole. But if you have a better way of explaining this (without creating notes with lists longer than 3 items; and even those I'd avoid), by all means I'll be open to reviewing it.
7. "Which pre-existing condition*..." — agreed, done.
8. "Why is it hard to estimate the case fatality rate (CFR) for COVID-19?" — yes, if you read through the sources in that note, you'll see that the CFR is very hard to estimate, due to asymptomatic and low-symptomatic cases, and a few other challenging issues.

from covid-19-anki-deck.

9. Well, in that Lancet study they say "Because coronavirus RNA detection is more sensitive than virus isolation, most studies have used qualitative or quantitative viral RNA tests as a potential marker for infectious coronavirus" and that "This has important implications for both patient isolation decision making and guidance around the length of antiviral treatment". I'm not sure whether it implies that the person is infectious after those 20 days, or likely infectious, or whether we simply don't know yet. In case you've seen more up-to-date information, do let me know.
10. "How can recovered patients help those struggling with the disease?" — you're right, it was very unspecific, I'll reword that. I've also just done a search for more recent data, and it seems that, at least in the US it's still under study, and classified as experimental therapy; the same applies to the UK. I've included a few more questions on the basic concepts there (plasma, convalescence, etc.)
11. You're right, I had that note (about the masks) marked because I wasn't satisfied with it and didn't have the time to look at it in more depth. Would you like to make a pull request with improvements and good sources?

from covid-19-anki-deck.

Thank you yet again for the work of providing the feedback. The deck is definitely better because of it. Let me know what you think about the various points I made. In the meantime, I've just pushed a few changes and new questions that I created while dealing with said points.

from covid-19-anki-deck.

@evolverine

11. Are the marks copied to my deck intentionally? Are all the marked cards to be somewhat wary about? I think it should be mentioned in the README, because people may be using marks for something including deleting, moving or even exporting elsewhere.

from covid-19-anki-deck.

11. Thank you, @aleksejrs, for mentioning it. I was using the marked tag as a way to remind me that some cards still need some polishing, or some more information checking. But you're right, some people might use them in different ways. I just went through them and made the necessary changes.

from covid-19-anki-deck.

Hey again, sorry for the late reply; Unfortunately, I am really strapped for time at the moment. I've seen that you already addressed a lot of my worries. Thanks for that.

1. formation that's impossible to know" — I wonder if the difference is on how we define "impossible". I use it to mean "even if we had all the resources and methods at our disposal", a sort of synonym of "logically impossible" (say, apart from a good prediction), because the events we care about (the deaths) have yet to happen. If so, I could define "impossible" with an asterisk as used above. Otherwise, what othe

My worry with this and the other question was more that: "What's impossible to know?" allows for all kinds of possible answers: Who was patient zero? What is the rate of infection? Will we be able to eliminate the disease? What will the overall death toll be?

So what this card (imho) does is condition you to reply to the front without any substantial connection. In my personal decks, I try to avoid cards like this at all costs, because I find that in a few months I cannot remember them and the knowledge feels disconnected.

1. Tuberculosis  — the challenge here is that there defining it as, say, a "bacterial infection of the lungs" doesn't suffice, because there are others that we don't call tuberculosis, so the definition is incomplete. So, at least in my mind, the definition needs to contain the name of the bacteria, which constrains the infection to being precisely TBC. 

I understand the reasoning; I just think that if someone asks you what Tuberculosis is, you don't have to be able to give something like an actual definition. It would be different, if the question was reversed and you were asked what the disease caused by myobacterium tuberculosis was.

from covid-19-anki-deck.

1. Well, in that Lancet study they say "Because coronavirus RNA detection is more sensitive than virus isolation, most studies have used qualitative or quantitative viral RNA tests as a potential marker for infectious coronavirus" and that "This has important implications for both patient isolation decision making and guidance around the length of antiviral treatment". I'm not sure whether it implies that the person is infectious after those 20 days, or likely infectious, or whether we simply don't know yet. In case you've seen more up-to-date information, do let me know.

Cool thanks, I couldn't access the study. I will try to find information that settles this question, but it might take me a while.

Edit: I haven't had time to really read all of it and think about it, but there is this nature study that supports (at least some) of my initial suspicions:
Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19

"Another study from Wuhan reported that virus was detected for a median of 20 days (up to 37 days among survivors) after symptom onset, but infectiousness may decline significantly 8 days after symptom onset, as live virus could no longer be cultured (according to Wölfel and colleagues[11]). "

The study they cite is also in nature:
Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019

I have neither the expertise nor the time to verify if this is a high enough confidence that infectiousness is long gone before day 20; But maybe it warrants formulating the card a bit more carefully.

from covid-19-anki-deck.

So what this card (imho) does is condition you to reply to the front without any substantial connection. In my personal decks, I try to avoid cards like this at all costs

I also try to avoid too generic cards. For this reason the context of these cards is meant to constrain the possible set of answers — if the context is "Official count not reflecting the ongoing reality of the COVID-19 spread", then it's clearer (I hope) that "what's impossible to know" is only related to having accurate counts / numbers of the spread of the illness. If you have any suggestions for wording the context or the questions better while achieving the same result (helping transmit the difference between the "official" and "actual" spread of the virus, plus the challenges of various official bodies of reporting the numbers accurately), I'll be glad to consider and integrate them.

I just think that if someone asks you what Tuberculosis is, you don't have to be able to give something like an actual definition

True, though if someone does indeed ask us what Tuberculosis is, we don't actually have to answer with all the content of our Anki cards. In this case I seem to value accuracy / correctness when learning more than simplicity. This also has the benefit of averting the potential, in the same imagined conversation, of being told 'yes, but there are many infections of the lungs".

Finally, thank you for the articles. I've added them to my reading list, I hope to get to them in the next few days.

from covid-19-anki-deck.

(feel free to reopen the issue if you feel there remain unaddressed topics)

from covid-19-anki-deck.