Talk:How Doctors Think

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wrote this pretty fast. would love to hear experienced editors opinions on how its put together, grammar, etc. Chantoke 10:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Chantoke, thanks for starting this article. I'm not sure if I qualify as an "experienced editor", but here are my proposals nonetheless. :) I think that the article should be shortened, perhaps condensing sections 1-6 into just 3-4 paragraphs: I think that the level of detail given is a little intimidating and it seems like the intent (AFAICT) is to summarize the book.

I wonder if a good structure would be to center the discussion around the successful and unsuccessful (i.e., cognitive errors such as onfirmation bias) thought strategies that were identified in the book. A clear summary of them would be very valuable even to those who've read the book, as it would be a reminder of its lessons.

I took the liberty of expanding the section now called "Suggestions for patients", because even though this is a very small part of the book by page count, IMO its suggestions are very important because they are easy things a layperson can do to improve their care. --R27182818 04:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

took out the praise in the 'public response section', which i believe was the 'soap box' element of the summary that you were critcizing. if there is anything else bothering you about this summary, please be more specific in your criticism. Chantoke 04:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)