Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? The article stays consistent with the topic throughout the article.
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article stays neutral and presents facts and strong article references to the point that post-migration factors are moderators for PTSD and other psychopathological outcomes.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The article outlines the dearth of research in this topic but the minority groups being represented do not appear to be underrepresented.
Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? References are from legitimate sources (i.e., Journal of Mental Health, JAMA, Journal of Traumatic Stress, etc...) All of these references come from neutral sources.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? This article is from 2013 and the oldest reference they used was from 1987 (Psychotherapy for Severely Traumatized Refugees), which could be updated.
Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Don't see article on talk page or any conversations on wikipedia. However, the article has been cited 24 times.
