User:Ginnalowe/Diastasis symphysis pubis/Navy Malinois Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Ginna Lowe


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Diastasis symphysis pubis
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Article has been edited. Link above.
 * Article has been edited. Link above.

Evaluate the drafted changes
 Lead : This section is concise and clearly describes the article's topic and what the reader will glean from reading the article.

'''I might add a quick sentence towards the end of the lead that talks about prognosis in relation to this disease and future pregnancies as this is mentioned in the article and is a very important reason why a patient might be seeking information on wikipedia. Otherwise, this section is wonderful.'''

 Content : The content is clear, organized and relevant to the topic.


 * Mechanism - clear and thorough section that reflects the references well.
 * Diagnosis - well thought out and organized with appropriate reference/s for each section under DX.
 * Management - The information is good, but sources are missing. I believe the source 7 under references could just be tagged under each area that says "citation needed" as that article contains the information listed here.

*prognosis: '''The reference under this section does not appear to contain information regarding prognosis. You found a beautiful article from 2021 (reference 6, Postpartum Pubic Symphysis Diastasis) that states: "No definitive recommendations exist regarding alteration of care for future pregnancies, and this would be a good area for future study". (This sentence can be found under the prognosis section of the review article).'''

 Tone and Balance :


 * The content is neutral and with information that is unbiased.

 References :


 * Resources are neutral and contains information from diverse group of authors without conflicting interests.


 * Many of the references fall outside of the 5 year range, however, this may simply reflect the lack of research in this area. If so, than you can ignore this critique!

 Organization :


 * This article was thorough, but concise and very easy to read. The article is organized very well in a way that allows the reader to better understand the topic.

 Images and Media:  No images or media were added by Ginna Lowe

Overall Impression:


 * The content added improves this article tremendously.
 * The strengths of the additional content will allow readers to better understand risk factors, diagnostic techniques, management and prognosis of this disease. The Lead section will allow readers to understand what they will glean from the article.
 * I would suggest changing the prognosis section to reflect the most recent views on prognosis (as stated in the your most up to date article - Postpartum Pubic Symphysis Diastasis) and add the missing citations below the paragraphs under the management section. You could then add a brief mention of prognosis in the Lead section.