User:Asb0910/Infant respiratory distress syndrome/Ksoccer22 Peer Review

Lead


 * The lead gave new content that I had not known about Infant Respiratory Distress Syndrome prior to this assignment.
 * The article has a lot of sentences that do not have any citations on them so it is unknown how reliable it is.
 * The article has facts in lists that are easy to read.

Content


 * This content is relevant because all of the information is epidemioly based on the distribution and determinents of Infant Respiratory Distress Syndrome.
 * The article focuses a lot of what groups are more at risk for the disease. There are not a lot of factors about the incidence or prevelenace of the disease which would be good to know.
 * It is a good article choice becasue it is the number one cause of death in premature babies- but would be good to know how often that is(numerical statistics)



Tone and Balance


 * There is a very nuetral tone that is 100% fact based and not opinionated


 * There are no opinions, just facts.
 * No viewpoints seem overstated, but maybe overall it is an understated article because it is so short.
 * It is not persausive and does a really good job conveying facts.



Sources and References


 * Sources are very current from 2019 and 2021, so this is good for current facts.
 * Both are reliable sources with valid information
 * The requirement is at least three references, and this article only has two.
 * Throughout the article, the facts do not have a citation at the end of the sentence.



Organization


 * There are no spelling or grammar errors that I noticed.
 * It is written clearly but I would do after you write "infant respiratory distress syndrome" but (IRDS) right next to it so it is easier to understand the abbrevaition.
 * I would also use a colon after saying the most common risk factors include:



Images and Media


 * There are no images and no media, could be good to add some for some more information



Overall Impressions


 * Good statr, underwhelming amount of information is presented. Try to find another good source and a few more sentences on the epidemiology of the disease.
 * Really interesting topic but lacking quantity.



General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) Bel4247


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Bel4247/sandbox


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)