User:Sam Halada/Pulmonary Embolism/Marksmkn3714 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?
  • Sam Halada
• Link to draft you're reviewing:
  • User:Sam Halada/Pulmonary Embolism

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
  • yes
• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
  • no
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
  • yes
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
  • yes
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • concise

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic?
  • Yes, good range of content.
• Is the content added up-to-date?
  • Yes, all sources 2018 and recent.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • No
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral?
  • Yes, no bias and just statistics.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
  • No
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
  • Some underrepresented. May be beneficial to add descriptive epidemiology such as what populations are more at risk due to factors like income, race, lifestyle or gender if it pertains to the subject.
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
  • No

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
  • yes
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
  • yes
• Are the sources current?
  • yes
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
  • N/A
• Check a few links. Do they work?
  • yes

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
  • I'm assuming it is still in bullets as this is just a rough draft.
• Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
  • No
• Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
  • Yes

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
  • Yes! Great statistics mentioned that will help the article.
• What are the strengths of the content added?
  • The mortality rates!
• How can the content added be improved?
  • Again, can maybe just add what populations (income, race, lifestyle) is more at risk, male vs female, or globally where is it more common.