User:IssaEm/Pelvic inflammatory disease/Pachacuti Inca Yupanqui Peer Review

General info
IssaEm
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:IssaEm/Pelvic_inflammatory_disease?veaction=edit&preload=Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Pelvic inflammatory disease

Evaluate the drafted changes
Overall I think there is a lot of good epidemiology information here that does not have a bias to it.Though it does feel when talking about the NHANES and NSFG studies there was an overwhelming amount of info that I don't know if it necessarily needs to be included. Such as all of the years used for estimating prevalence. Also the results section should probably be the main focus of that particular section than the methods of the study. I did like the at risk groups though are the "pop. at risk" and "distribution/etiology/risk factors" lists the same and should be combined?

"A limitation of this is that diagnostic tests are not included in routine check-ups, and cannot be done using signs and symptoms alone; the required diagnostic tests are more invasive than that." This is a section out of the prognosis paragraph that I was confused about. Is it about early detection of PID, and that it is not done?

There are some sections that do not have cited sources in the pop. at risk/ distribution and treatment section.

In the prevention section "Using latex condoms to prevent STD's that may go untreated" was already mentioned in the sentence it was inserted into.

Overall I think there is good information that will be improving the page considerably but I think it needs to be condensed a little.