User:Jdpcal/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating the Wikipedia article on Pradaxa.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because my sister is currently on Pradaxa for stroke prevention, and I hope to specialize in anticoagulation as a pharmacist one day. This drug matters because it is an important direct oral anticoagulant that has been developed in the past two decades. My preliminary impression of the article consisted of a confused understanding as to why the history of the drug mattered so much. However, as I read further into the historical background of the drug, I realized the importance of addressing its origins and the different key players that have contributed to this advancement.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The article has a good overview with important and useful information.

Content: The article can include more clinical pearls in its medical uses section. More clinical information in the medical uses section can make the article more informative and useful.

Tone Balance: The article is objective without use of bias in its description of the drug information.

Sources and References: The medical uses and pharmacokinetic information sections need to be updated. Systematic reviews of non-inferiority to warfarin should be included for both efficacy and bleeding risk as a primary outcome and side effect for use of this drug. The pharmacokinetic section can be updated using the package insert for the drug.

Organization and Writing Quality: There is good organization and the flow makes sense for an article about a single drug. There needs to be improved information on the pharmacology of the drug, especially because there is a single sentence about Pradaxa being a prodrug without any information on why this would be important clinically.

Images and Media: The image of the drug is a simple molecular structure. This would suffice in identification; however, it could also be useful to have a pill image section with all of the different pills and their corresponding manufacturers.

Talk Page Discussion: There is mention of bias in clinical trials and misinterpretation that should be addressed.

Overall impressions: I enjoyed this article and it provided just the right amount of information with proper citations.