My only concern is this is part of a set of cards that all use the same wording. so if we change one we need to change them all.
Good point, my only issue is I also mess up this card and answer eosinophilia, or we can put a hint ::not eosinophilia or IgE?
I think I’d prefer updating them all to " immunofluorescence finding" over a hint.
This is not just immunofluorescence though, it is an auto-antibody… that wording seems a bit confusing to me
Huh, agree with Jacob that this would confuse me because I’ve never thought of this as an immunofluorescence test, thought it was typically done via serum.
More to the point, though, seems the purpose of this set of cards is to recall p- vs c-ANCA. Quick search shows these are the only cards that have us do so for each individual disease. Couldn’t we reformat each of the cards into a sentence with the cloze around p/c? So for this one:
Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) is associated with positive {{c1::p}}-ANCA testing
Unless we think there is utility to being able to cold recall that ANCA is involved? Could move the whole cloze over {{c1::p-ANCA}}
not opposed to ^^
Just another thought, what if we just changed the word “significant” for “unique” or “novel” or something like that, and called it a day? I mean “IgE” and “Eosinophilia” aren’t very unique findings.
What unique laboratory finding is associated with eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA)?
{{c1::Positive p-ANCA}}
For unique, p-ANCA also shows up in MPO, so that would throw some people off.
@Cameron think this needs to be cold recall unfortunately. I think we just change wording to auto-antibody or antibody
I think a hint would solve this the easiest and keep everything the same
Maybe the best compromise would be to leave card as-is, and just add “eosinophils are also elevated” in the extra section?
@AnKing-Maintainers merged another open suggestion to add the hint as @Ahmed7 suggested, are we okay will rejecting this one in light of new change?