User:Escadar Alemayehu/Postpartum Depression/Amyzhou314 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Postpartum Depression group


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Escadar Alemayehu/Postpartum Depression
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Postpartum depression

Evaluate the drafted changes
In case you didn't see the comments I left on the Talk page of the sandbox draft, I've also pasted it below.

--

Hey guys! Overall I think you all did a great job at finding reliable and suitable sources and will contribute a meaningful and significant amount of new content to the Wiki article. I noticed some of the content is old, but since it was hard for me to distinguish old from new, my comments will address everything on the page and will hopefully help to improve the overall quality of the article. I also wasn't able to tease out where and how you guys used the new references since it wasn't added into the paragraphs yet, so I won't be able to comment on that.

In general, be mindful of grammar--I noticed a couple throughout and it makes reading and comprehending the content more difficult. There are also some areas that are a bit wordy and can be rephrased in a more clear and concise way. Furthermore, in my opinion, it's best to stay consistent in how you reference the issue at hand: PPD or postpartum depression or post-partum depression or PPDS. Maybe just pick 1 or 2?

Causes/Risk Factors section: What is DHA, thyroiditis, the HPA axis? I think the general audience wouldn't necessarily know abbreviations and medical terms like that, so it may be best to use more simply terms and/or link their corresponding Wiki articles. I'm also still a bit confused about breastfeeding and PDD: it's listed as a risk factor, but then below it says the relationship is unclear. I think more explanation would be helpful here. Lastly, I do think the shorter paragraphs are easier to read; however, I think some more structure and transitions would help streamline it. Can they be presented in a way that flows better?

Society and Culture section: There were just some phrases here that I think could be reworded to improve clarity, and I also think would just match the overall voice of the article better. For instance: "blown by the wind" and “encourage a higher profile for PPD amongst the health professional community.”

Europe section: I think this section could be more specific; rather than letting us know there are differences in symptoms and treatment, tell us what those differences are.

Stigma section: For the beginning, I don't think it's necessary to explain what the definition is; it's probably easier to just link it to the Wiki page and jump straight into the stigma of PPD. I also feel like this section could benefit from more sources, especially since the current one seems like a one-off study. Lastly, I think one of the study's findings didn't completely match what was reported here: "Familiarity with PPD was associated with perceived PPD stigma in others but not personal PPD stigma" (this was taken straight from the abstract). The language here overall was a bit technical, and perhaps it would help with delivery of the information to reword it in more simple terms.

I know these suggestions are all a bit nit-picky, but these were just some things that stuck out when I read it. Again, you guys did a fantastic job. Definitely let me know if you want me to elaborate on any of these comments or take a look at anything else!