User:HannahPNeuro/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Opioid Use Disorder
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen to review this article due to the increasing prevalence of opioid related deaths in society.

Lead

 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the lead clearly describes what opioid use disorder is and follows the introductory sentence with a variety of negative outcomes that this disorder has on patients.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? A brief description of the article's section is included at the beginning, and each topic is covered very superficially. I thought the addition of the statistics behind the disorder was a good way of drawing the reader in without including to much detail for an introductory paragraph.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, the introduction does not stray away from the topics that are discussed in the lower sections.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think the lead was very concise and does not go into too much detail. I also think it covered all the important topics regarding opioid use disorder. I do think that the recovery/treatment portion was slightly overly detailed, and could've been cut down and expanded on only in the later sections.

Lead evaluation
As stated above, I do believe this introductory section provides a great outlook on what is discussed in depth throughout the article. I think the brief introductory sentences described an accurate overview of the disorder itself. I also think including the different types of the drug "hydrocodone, heroin, morphine, etc" was important since many individuals do not realize that the drugs they are prescribed are opioids and have a high risk of abuse.

Content

 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, all of the content discussed in the article is relevant to the disorder itself. They included epidemiology, management, prevention, diagnosis, mechanism, cause, signs, and symptoms. They also included history, which was not mentioned in the introductory paragraphs.
 * Is the content up-to-date? All of the content was up-to-date besides the epidemiology section. Many of the statistics were > 5 years old. Since the opioid epidemic is such a large issue in society, there is more recent statistics that accurately portray the severity of the problem as of late 2019. I think this should be updated to represent the exponential growth that continues to increase yearly.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, all the content listed directly relates to opioid use disorder.

Content evaluation
Overall, I think that the content itself is accurate and up-to-date (minus epidemiology). I think the treatment section (non-medicinal) can be expanded on, especially since homeopathic methods of treatment are becoming more common in society due to affordability and decreased risk. Additionally, the prevention section of the article is rather small and could be expanded on to include more statistics on the overuse of pharmaceutical drugs in both inpatient and outpatient settings.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the article neutral? Yes, the author/s do not have any negative connotations about people who suffer from opioid use disorder in any portion of the article.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented? No.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Yes, the article is directed towards avoiding, treating, or preventing the disorder altogether. I would not consider this a bias.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone and balance of the article was very neutral and centered towards prevention and management of the disorder, rather than portraying any judgement toward users and people who suffer from an addiction to opioids. The article was balanced in terms of educating and providing resources for individuals who suffer or know someone who suffers from this disorder.

Sources and References

 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No, some of the facts come from news sources such as New York Times. Some of the outlets provided are known to be very controversial on their articles, which decreases reliability substantially because they are no longer considered neutral. In order to determine whether or not these sources are truly reliable, the primary source would have to be checked. Next to this, the rest of the review articles provided were reliable and came from valid and trustworthy journals.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, all the sources included reflect the information that's publicly available.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, most of the sources are from papers that were published in the past 6 years.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Sources and references evaluation
Overall, the sources provided in the reference section of the article were thorough and current. I would avoid using any sort of news outlet as a secondary source of information for a topic that has a wide array of reviewed journals. This would increase the validity of the information provided and decrease the instability when trying to connect information that does from a solid source versus information that does not.

Organization

 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the article was easy to read and flowed through sections well.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Organization evaluation
The organization of this article was very clear and flowed through sections well. The author/s did a good job of emphasizing symptoms and other bullets that could easily be lost in the paragraphs.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, the images included enhance the understanding of the section they are laid out in. I do believe that the author/s could've included more images that serve to explain the more complex sections (such as opioid mechanisms).
 * Are images well-captioned? The images included are well captioned and correlate with the section they belong in.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes.

Images and media evaluation
I believe that the image and media section of the article is rather poor. There isn't many images and the article appears to be rather dry. I think adding more visual aids will assist to reveal not only the severity but make the information more clear from individuals who do not like reading long paragraphs.

Checking the talk page

 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Many students who are in both pharm-D and medical programs had not only reviewed the article but separately offered revisions on the talk page (for their graduate courses). They also have suggested sections to add and remove to create a more well-rounded, accurate, and up-to-date article.
 * How is the article rated? Class C
 * Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is part of the Wiki project of Medicine: MUSC College of Medicine.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We have not discussed drugs or drug routes yet in class, but they do include the mechanism of opioids which goes into detail about which receptors are used and how it leads to overdose.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is very in depth and contains many possible revisions to improve the overall content and set-up of the article. I do also like that is many graduate students who study the mechanism and action of drugs, specifically opioids. These students have knowledge of the most recent information offered at University and publicly. I think revising the article around some of their suggestions could definitely strengthen it overall.

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status? Well written and accurate article.
 * What are the article's strengths? Layout and Content
 * How can the article be improved? Images and Visual Aids
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Well-developed, could use minor revisions

Overall evaluation
Overall, the tone, language, layout, and overall flow of the article is great. It is very easy to read and does not get overly complicated, and also provides links to other resources if one would like to know a section more in depth. Although I believe incorporating more images and visual aids is necessary, the content itself is very well-rounded and remains neutral. The addition of images will help to draw in more visual learners, rather than individuals who prefer reading. I also think that the author gathered a wide variety of valid secondary sources and correctly assigned accreditation those authors.