User:Neuro1111/Refractive error/Monicro98 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Neuro111


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Refractive Error

Evaluate the drafted changes
Hello, I have read your work plan and the article. Refractive errors are very common and thus should have more information for people to understand it better. Here are some points I would like to make on the article in general as it is now after changes been made.


 * The introduction is a little all over the place. It starts off strong but then makes it difficult to understand the organization.
 * Epidemiology could be higher because it is lost at the end of the article, and the introduction has some information that could be integrated into the epidemiology section.
 * The quantitive calculations of a refractive error could be explained in a much more visual manner or eliminated all together, because this is information for specialists, not as easy to understand for the general public.
 * You could mention which cycloplegic agents are used and their duration, and also what they do.
 * You could add images to improve the understanding of the types of glasses, and also explain divergent and convergent lenses.
 * The cost is not that important, and could be eliminated.
 * Some of the bibliography is not open access.

See you around. Monicro98 (talk) 17:54, 10 July 2021 (UTC)