User:Charlottebaker1/Irritable bowel syndrome/Cab1234567 Peer Review

General info
Christian Boudreau reviewing Charlotte Baker
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:Charlottebaker1/Irritable bowel syndrome
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Irritable bowel syndrome

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * - Everything in the article appears relevant to the topic. Linking each of the symptoms and the systems of the body to their respective wikipedia pages allows readers to understand the syndrome more in depth if desired.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * - The article maintains a neutral stance with no obvious statements or phrasing that would indicate a bias. This includes the citations where, after review of the links, appear to be reviews or meta-analyses of many bodies of work.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * - I am curious if there is any more information regarding the psychological therapies portion of this article. I understand that there was inconsistent evidence about the effectiveness of these treatments, but are there any other techniques (besides exercise) that have not already been mentioned?
 * Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * - The links do work, though it appears as though there are only two of them. I'm not sure if there needs to be two separate citations for the same systematic review (genuine questions)? The sources support the claims in the article, though there are a couple of spots (the last sentence of each of the "Signs and symptoms" and "psychological therapies") where there are no citations. I believe that these are supposed to be cited with the citation in the sentence before, but I would check to make sure.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
 * - It appears that the oldest meta-analysis was from 2018, so I believe the information is relatively up-to-date. Overall great job and I really enjoyed learning about IBS- I had no idea that chronic fatigue syndrome overlapped with it!
 * - The links do work, though it appears as though there are only two of them. I'm not sure if there needs to be two separate citations for the same systematic review (genuine questions)? The sources support the claims in the article, though there are a couple of spots (the last sentence of each of the "Signs and symptoms" and "psychological therapies") where there are no citations. I believe that these are supposed to be cited with the citation in the sentence before, but I would check to make sure.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
 * - It appears that the oldest meta-analysis was from 2018, so I believe the information is relatively up-to-date. Overall great job and I really enjoyed learning about IBS- I had no idea that chronic fatigue syndrome overlapped with it!
 * - It appears that the oldest meta-analysis was from 2018, so I believe the information is relatively up-to-date. Overall great job and I really enjoyed learning about IBS- I had no idea that chronic fatigue syndrome overlapped with it!