This becomes a net 0. Ideally it becomes a net positive change where we have less amount of clozes in total.
I am not familiar with this set of cards, @herstein.jacob can you weigh in? What needs to be clozed/what doesn’t, ideally we only have c1 and max c2
This is the set of cards:
There seems to be a significant amount of redundancy and overlap in the information presented. I agree with you though; including only c1 on this card would streamline the content more effectively. Moreover, the three clozes represent three steps of pathophysiology, so it would make more sense to test them together on the same card. I have revised the suggestion accordingly.
Think it should be consolidated from 3 to 2 notes, one note for etiology, and other for pathophys. Getting both in one will make it bulky and hence against the good card principle. Support consolidation.
Okay with 2 cards, it would be a net negative (meaning 1 less cloze when merging all this together)
I have only ever really seen the vascular accident portion tested. UW does mention the necrosis/resorption part in explanations, but not sure if it is HY and we do not cloze it on any current form of the card. I would do c1 on risk, c2 on pathophys, no cloze on the necrosis aspect (like @Sameem suggested)
Agree with @Sameem and @herstein.jacob
Thank you, everyone, for your inputs. I’ve edited the suggestion accordingly. Moreover, I’ve found that nid:1482289480639 could also be consolidated with the other cards. Let me know what you think.
New edit looks good imo, support. Although I’d change drugs to agents for the smoking part
Let’s wrap up this discussion and aim to gather as many likes as possible to push these significant changes forward. The updates include removing 2 cards and making substantial revisions to the main card
For a detailed overview, please check out the bulk suggestion here:
Here’s what I’ve done today to enhance the suggestion further:
-
Simplified the card: moved examples of associated maternal risk factors and common intestinal pathologies from the text field to the extra field
-
Incorporated the notion of “apple peel” appearance from nid:1482289483439
-
Added @beejumm’s illustration and associated tag
I’ve also tried to take into account previous comments on this card—please check whether your inputs have been implemented as intended, or let me know if further adjustments are needed
Your feedback is much appreciated—thanks for your input!
Support
@anking-maintainers bump
The additional resources and changed tags would need to be reset right?
Probably need to revisit in Slack since this is multi-card change