Talk:Micropsia

The good article status of this article is being reassessed by the community to determine whether the article meets the good article criteria. Please add comments to the reassessment page.

^{Date: 04:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)}

Micropsia has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 25, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed

Medicine: Neurology / Ophthalmology GA‑class Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Ophthalmology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Possible Revisions

You mentioned there are drugs being that block vascular endothelial growth factors being evaluated as a treatment option in your current and future research section. Can you go into more detail about how this mechanism works at the cellular level in relation to vision improvements? Lildevil3221 (talk) 01:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further details describing the mechanism behind blocking vascular endothelial growth factors as a treatment option would be more appropriate on the wiki page for VEGF or macular degeneration rather than on the wiki page of the resulting symptom Micropsia. Giantsjs2000 (talk) 20:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of useful information on micropsia can be found in the paper by Ugarte M, Williamson TH, Horizontal and vertical micropsia following macula-off rhegmatogenous retinal-detachment surgical repair. This study quantifies the degree of dysmetropsia in the vertical and horizontal meridians independently and offers insight into a possible theory centered on a decrease in photoreceptor density that may lead to less stimulation in a certain region of the eye in some post-eye surgery patients that may lead to the phenomenon of micropsia. Another paper by de Wit G.C, Retinally-induced aniseikonia, also provides useful information along the same lines that may fit under the causes or physiology section of your article. Hassan.zayn (talk) 09:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input. The information from that article has now been included into the causes section with it as a reference.Giantsjs2000 (talk) 17:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be a few redundancies between the introduction and the actual article. Perhaps making the introduction as more of a lead-in to the actual article rather than stating a summary could be more effective. In the "causes" section, you say that use of hallucinogenic drugs could also contribute. There was only a little blurb in the last sentence of the second to last paragraph. A few things in the "current and future research" section also overlap with "treatments." if you can combine the two into another subset of "future treatments," the later part of the "current and future research" section could be less confusing when it feels like some of those issues should have been addressed in the other section. Overall, a good improvement to the previous article. Justindchien (talk) 01:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the organizational advice. We are working on making our article as concise as possible and will take your suggestions into account when doing so. CharlesWCII^talk 02:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, great article. I found another article that may help. It goes into detail in how prism correction is a possible treatment for micropsia. Other causes for micropsia are discussed, including MS. The article is called "Presumed Ocular Myasthenia and Micropsia A Case Report" by Michaeli-Cohen, Adi M.D.; Almog, Yehoshua M.D.; Loewenstein, Anat M.D.; Stolovitch, Chaim M.D.; Gutman, Izaac M.D.; Lazar, Moshe M.D. Here is the link http://journals.lww.com/jneuro-ophthalmology/Abstract/1996/03000/Presumed_Ocular_Myasthenia_and_Micropsia_A_Case.5.aspx. Just click for the pdf file. chengkd (talk) 9:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

That is an interesting treatment that I had not come across in our research. Thanks a lot for the article. We have added the information to the "Treatment" section. CharlesWCII^talk 04:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, your article is very informative, but I agree with a comment above that you are redundant at times, but the comment above covers that well. I think something you guys could focus more on is finding more specifics at the cellular level of what actually occurs. What I mean is that your page lists many of the causes of micropsia, which is great, but there is a lack of detail as to what specifically happens, such as what pathways are affected that cause a migraine to then cause micropsia to result? What changes occur in the brain that result in micropsia? Other than trying to be more specific, your article is well-done. Widrickm (talk) 17:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. Studies that look into the mechanisms behind micropsia have been difficult to come by so far, but we are still looking and would be eager to add any research explaining the pathway(s) behind the condition to our article. CharlesWCII^talk 18:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

see above Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]