User:Grahtreas/Bariatric surgery/Friasal Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Grahtreas


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Bariatric surgery
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Bariatric surgery

Evaluate the drafted changes
Grahtreas,

I think overall your changes have been fantastic. You clearly care about the topic of bariatric surgery and helping to keep the article as up-to-date and has helpful for patients as possible. So thank you for that.

Feedback for a few of your edit histories:

Added a section on Economic Implications: This section is great. And I'm surprised that there wasn't any such section before. I really appreciate your discussion regarding estimated costs for patients, but particularly the estimates in cost recovery due to decreased healthcare spending, gains in QALYS and increased productivity. It's presented in a neutral way, but may motivate people who would otherwise be deterred from the cost of bariatric surgery to consider it further.

Removed redundant or contradictory information in mortality/morbidity: You should add a comma in 174772 (to make it 174,772-- easier on the eyes). Fantastic that you included median life expectancy extension for patients with and without diabetes with that Lancet article. Not sure what information the 2014 article had, but this seems sufficient.

Added section on T2DM: Again, similar to economic implications-- thank you for making a section discussing type 2 diabetes benefits specifically. I would be careful with your wording on bariatric surgery being a 'cure' for diabetes. You would know better than me regarding the literature, but in the paragraph before you say patients can often discontinue their diabetes meds. I would maybe get rid of the cure sentence altogether.

Multidisciplinary blurb: Great. Most med wikis probably need a high yield multidisciplinary blurb.

Updated indications: Really really great stuff. I had no idea they dropped the BMI requirements. THanks for including the latest criteria. I would consider getting rid of the "historical" BMI > 40 or >35 with comorbidities or at least putting it below the current indications. Just so that we can read the current indications at the top and not get confused.

Added physiology section: The section looks really nice. And you did a great job making it easily readable especially for a non-medical audience. Now, I would just consider formatting the italicized sections into subheadings. You don't see a lot of wikis with italicized text instead of a subheading. So for example:

Restricting food intake: This is accomplished by reducing....

into

 Restricting Food Intake 

This is accomplished by reducing...

Reorganized "types" section: I think it was really important to reorganize this in the matter that you did. It makes the most common surgeries easily accessible and prioritized in the minds of readers...as they should be. Unless they are specifically looking for historical procedures

Author response to peer review
Thanks so much for your input!

I agree with all the changes you recommended. The few that I did not change:


 * Diabetes: I continued to list this as a cure, since that was the verbage used in the articles I read

Additional changes I made


 * Updated the mental health section to be more comprehensive, and acknowledge both the benefits and potential adverse events of the procedure
 * Context on new guidelines, since this is new, I made sure the information was dated, and that readers should expect to see changes in the near future (to hedge against the mismatching information they will likely come across).