the card shlepis mentions is below
The diagnostic criteria for HFrEF is:
{{c1::Symptoms of heart failure}}
{{c1::LVEF <40%}}
i don’t think we should delete either as the LVEF cards are quite small and helpful, although i am biased.
My only quarrel is what does the student gain from memorising the same content worded differently?
i agree with your point, i suppose my rationalisation is that it is such an important concept, that having the “clinical diagnostic” vs “physiological” criteria separated into diff cards is important enough.
Points taken all round. Generally speaking, looking at the two cards, I would support a merge in this case. I appreciate that sometimes there is a utility in having overlapping cards, as you and I have discussed recently @neurotherapy, but I do think here the cards are so similar that it’s superfluous to have both in their current form.
I would however suggest that the deck may benefit from having both cards, if one was reworked a little.
NID:1676719472445 could be reformatted to ask ‘What is the primary delineation between heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction?’, whereby the answer is ejection fraction greater than or less than 40%. Although this is essentially the same answer, I think it is a slightly different question being asked.
I think that NID:1676983359983 can remain as is, although I would personally reformat it to:
What forms the diagnostic criteria for HFrEF?
{{c1::Symptoms of heart failure,
Left ventricular ejection fraction < 40%}}
i.e. put answer into one cloze. This is a borderline case, but I think it might be a little bit too easy with two clozes and I think it would be reasonable to be asked to recall the two criteria in the real world; therefore I think it would be better to have it in one cloze.
What are your thoughts?