Talk:Open-source ventilator

Copied Content

This draft's content was copy-pasted from Ventilator#Open-source_ventilator; editors interested in how it was formulated should look to that article's history. SamHolt6 (talk) 23:30, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Capitalization and redirect

Just a note that the lower case Open-source ventilator is now a redirect to Ventilator#Open-source ventilator. This should be lower case, but that fix needs an administrator since that redirect has a history. SchreiberBike | ⌨  21:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

MIT design

The whole page and all the pictures here appear to be cc-by-sa 4.0 if anyone wants to migrate them: https://e-vent.mit.edu/ Victor Grigas (talk) 18:10, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Material specifications

During the COVID-19 emergency, the ASTM has temporarily made relevant specifications freely available here. Learn and disseminate, folks! LeadSongDog come howl! 15:10, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

List of/Comparison of article?

Following up Talk:Ventilator#open source and Talk:Ventilator#Comparison of open source projects: @Omygoshogolly: See articles such as List of open-source mobile phones, List of open-source hardware projects or Comparison of text editors for either List of or Comparison of type articles to use as a model. External references would be needed, and generally sourced, NPOVed articles would be needed on each of the individual projects as evidence that they're Wikipedia-notable. Some red links would probably be accepted for some time, but not a list/comparison that is mostly red. I would suggest starting with a few articles for some which are well-developed and for which references are easily available, then start the list of or comparison of article (comparison would be better it seems to me) with those plus a smaller number of red links.

If this sounds like a lot of work, keep in mind that there's no point 3D printing ventilator parts if they're not well-checked by the software community and by the sorts of online tech media that are willing to give some sort of wider community judgment on them. A badly functioning ventilator might do more harm than good.

There's effectively a rough draft of the article/table at Talk:Ventilator#Comparison of open source projects. Boud (talk) 00:18, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Boud and others, are you aware of this academic, peer reviewed, creative commons article:

• A review of open source ventilators for COVID-19 and future pandemics [version 1; peer review: 1 approved] https://f1000research.com/articles/9-218/v1

Yug (talk) 12:06, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, already in the article external links. Not sure it has been integrated tho. Yug (talk) 12:10, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Yug: Excellent!  Done I'm surprised that exegetes of WP:MEDRS didn't already call for this article to be deleted - since there are no meta-reviews showing that open-source ventilators are clinically tested on homo sapiens in double-blinded randomised controlled tests and shown to be more effective than water with nanostructure "radio wave memory" of virus shapes... At least the article should be a bit more defendable against an AfD now. The "disaster-situation" adjective in the first few words should also help against any attempts at an AfD. Boud (talk) 13:30, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Sources

• 04-18: 10 African Countries Have No Ventilators. That’s Only Part of the Problem. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/18/world/africa/africa-coronavirus-ventilators.html Yug (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

a complete project

theres a project of open source ventilator called OpenVentilator, which i think is complete and has proper documentation and design files available. link : https://popsolutions.co/en_US/openventilator.