User:FutureMD-SR/Erythema toxicum neonatorum/88meded Peer Review

Peer review
I am providing a peer review of the erythema toxicum neonatorum page currently being edited by FutureMD-SR as a part of a WikiProject Medicine medical school course.

Lead evaluation
Nice expansion of the lead section with the new information which strikes an appropriate balance between detail (i.e., stats) and overview. I especially like the inclusion of the prognosis (i.e., benign), upfront, as this is likely information the lay reader will be interested in. Nice rewording to avoid jargon. A small comment: could read just as easily as a single paragraph which would improve visual flow. Overall excellent.

Content evaluation
Balanced addition of relevant content throughout the article. Detail level is appropriate, however the cause and the diagnosis sections have a fair amount of jargon. Great use of in-links, which are helpful for interpretation, however consider including a few sentences on what these things mean for the patient, for example, what does a culture feel like for a patient. Overall good.

Tone and balance evaluation
Content is neutral and scientific. My only suggestion, as above, would be to try to reinterpret jargon where possible. Overall excellent.

Sources and references evaluation
Most sentences appear well referenced. The only place where sourcing is unclear to me is the second paragraph of the diagnosis section: is everything there attributable to source [5]? All sources are appropriate secondary resources which are relatively current. Overall excellent.

Organization evaluation
Information reads well overall. Article flows well overall. Consider moving the epidemiology section to the top of the article, consistent with the structure of the lead, since it feels a little out of place at the end. Overall excellent.

Images and media evaluation
No pictures added yet, however I think one would be an excellent addition to the article, if available.

Overall evaluation
Overall strong additions of information relevant to a lay audience. My main comments to further improve the article would be minimizing jargon and adding media. Nice work.