User:Cnoellec49/Undertreatment of pain/Laurencox1 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

(provide username) TeakHo, Amyzhou314, Cnoellec49


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Cnoellec49/Undertreatment of pain
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Undertreatment of pain

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.)

By section I felt like the affected populations section was well written with little biases noted in the writing. I think this section did a good job of adding concerns about the disparities in terms of race and I also felt like the attention to Sickle Cell diseases specifically added an interesting component that i didn't think was addressed in the article. Also since it is a bit of a sensitive subject the rhetoric is very factual with keeps out some potentially sensitive information and factual is good in terms of wikipedia. I also felt the inclusion of gender was good because this was also a drawback that was missing.

The second section focusing on causes i felt was an interesting addition focusing on the differences and disparities based on regions. I think maybe an organizational tip would either be to add more information or to consolidate these sections. I feel like they are a little short so maybe beefing them up or consolidating would be beneficial.

The final two sections are beneficial and well written as well i don't see any issues here.

Overall, i feel like these additions are well written and concise without any issues and conflicting language. I feel like the sources y'all used are noteworthy and reliable sources, and I feel like all of your sentences are sources properly which is important. Really good article guys!