User:Brandonalina/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Cardiac rehabilitation
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have chosen this article because my future career is physical therapy and I am thinking that I would like to specialize in cardiac rehabilitation.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a branch of rehabilitation medicine or physical therapy dealing with optimizing physical function in patients with cardiac disease or recent cardiac surgeries.

Cardiac rehabilitation is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "The sum of activity and interventions required to ensure the best possible physical, mental, and social conditions so that patients with chronic or post-acute cardiovascular disease may, by their own efforts, preserve or resume their proper place in society and lead an active life".

Cardiac rehabilitation is a comprehensive exercise, education, and behaviour modification program with a goal of helping patients restore and maintain optimal health while helping to reduce the risk of future heart problems.

CR services can be provided during hospitalization for the event or in an outpatient setting. While the "glue" of cardiac rehabilitation is exercise, programs are evolving to become comprehensive prevention centers where all aspects of preventive cardiology care are delivered. This includes nutritional therapies, weight loss programs, management of lipid abnormalities with diet and medication, blood pressure control, diabetes management, and stress management. CR exercise and prevention programs are supported by the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the Lead does a good job of explaining what cardiac rehabilitation is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, the Lead does include a brief description of the major topics; however, it does not explain all the topics throughout the body.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, the lead mentions weight loss and other nutritional therapies; however they are not explained further in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The Lead is concise and to the point; however, it is misleading to mention all of these topics and not mention them in the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the content addresses the topic, but not completely.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes, the references used are from the previous decade. However, the medical field is always evolving so I am sure there have been some changes in the time the article was last updated.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Some of the content mentioned in the Lead is not explained further in the body of the article.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, the article gives a fair basis on what cardiac rehab entails.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, it gives information from multiple sides.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There could definitely be more of an emphasis on rehabilitation strategies, such as physical therapy and nutrition.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it seems fair in that sense.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, facts are backed up.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, most go into pretty good depth.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, the sources are from the last decade or two.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they do.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it is concise, but a little too short.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, however, there should be more sections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No.
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? N/A
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated Start-Class and is part of WikiProjects Medicine.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is decent but definitely has some work to be done.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article has a good basis in its Lead.
 * How can the article be improved? The article does not go into depth of vital things mentioned in the Lead.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is under-developed.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: Talk:Cardiac rehabilitation