User:Lauren.tweedie/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Adherence (medicine)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose a B class article listed under pharmacology as an article that may have merits but may also be in need of improvement.

Evaluate the article
Lead: the overall lead section gives a good introduction to the topic and its relevance to healthcare. The article is listed under adherence but the article itself primarily uses the term compliance, which is somewhat confusing and as highlighted on the talk page may be a less appropriate word choice. There are some grammatical errors.

Content: some repetition of content. Good overview of debate on terminology. Lacks citations in many places.

Tone and balance: focused predominantly on US and UK statistics and doesn't properly highlight this in all places, leading to an overly general statistical presentation.

Sources and references: lacks citations or needs improved citations in a number of places but also uses WHO, NIH, and NHS citations as high quality references.

Organization and writing quality: the overall organization is reasonable but there is disparate attention paid to the different subsections of the article and a number of uncited claims.

Images and media: lacks media but has some useful equations and charts.

Talk page discussion: discusses adherence vs. compliance but there was apparently never a consensus agreement on this.

Overall impressions: a useful introduction to the topic, factors affecting adherence, and adherence in different disease states. There are a large quantity of uncited claims and statistics which prevents the article from being appropriate in an academic context.