User:Ginnalowe/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Diastasis symphysis pubis

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I am intersted in Obstetrics and once had a patient case on my rotations that we suspected was experiencing Pubic Symphysis Diastasis. Looking at this article I could see that it had a good framework and overview of the disease state, but there was room for elaboration regarding presentation, mechanism of injury, workup and management. This article matters, as it is an occurrence in women's health and not discussed prior to pregnancy and labor in many cases. While not extremely common, it is worth the general public knowing about and in some cases may prompt questions from patients to their health care providers that may have not arose otherwise.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

In regards to the Lead section, it is a well rounded overview of the disease state. It describes what pubic symphysis diastasis is and a brief description of mechanisms of injury and signs and symptoms. There is not a citation listed within the lead paragraph.

The content in this article is presented in an objective way, with a neutral tone. Where there is room for improvement is in the "Cause" section. As of now, the main cause is listed as severe trauma, and does not list anything regarding pregnancy or child labor, despite listing this in the lead section. Additionally, risk factors could be discussed so that the reader may gain more information and take that information to their health care provider to gain more insight into the injury. There may also be addition differential diagnoses beside the one listed that may be valuable as well.

The diagnosis section is well done, listing multiple imaging modalities. Adding additional information about how to choose which imaging modality may be beneficial. In addition, having physical exam findings that contribute to the diagnosis may be helpful.

The management section also may benefit from additional information to give a full picture of treatment options for readers. In addition, if there is information or research that has been done on prevention of pubic symphysis diastases, that would be a nice addition to the article.

Finally, because this injury is quite rare, discussing epidemiology of it should be listed in the article. There is a epidemiological statistic listed in the lead section, however it is not cited.

The radiological images are useful for giving a visual representation of what this injury looks like on Xray. There may also be value in incorporating a picture of the anatomy of the pelvis and a de-identified picture of a pelvis from a case that has been reported if available.

Overall the organization and tone of this article is well done. There are areas that would benefit from the incorporation of additional information in order to present a full picture of the disease state.