User:Millersamanth/Antisocial personality disorder/N8tegr8 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? Millersamanth NStoinski
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Millersamanth/sandbox

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?


 * Is the content added up-to-date? Yes.

Content evaluation
Yes the changes to the prognosis and epidemiology are relevant and add to sections already marked for expansion. Really good, much needed additions. All of the new content seems up to date.

Tone and Balance
The tone seems neutral, so no issues here.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Yes most of the new content is backed up by reliable sources. The one thing I would add is a citation for the part about how treatment is difficult because people with ASPD are motivated to appear cured. I know we talked about it in class so you could probably cite the book, or find another study describing this effect. The sources all seem pretty current and the ones with links work. I know it is hard to find meta studies on these personality topics, but if you can they are prefered by the MEDRS guidelines. Overall really good sources that add a lot to the topic.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
Overall the content you added is concise and well-written. You are still in the processes of adding more information, but so far your writing styles do a great job of getting the information across. Regarding the organization, I just have a few suggestions. I am not sure what else you are going to be adding and editing, but I would consider merging or referencing the epidemiology in the section about comorbidity, because they seem to be talking about the some of the same things. Also it might be good to add the section about suicidality to epidemiology or comorbidity, but it also makes sense to leave it in the prognosis section.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
You all did a really good job adding to the sections that really need expansion. A lot of good sources and well summarized information. Just make sure to cite that treatment thing and maybe look for some meta studies.