User:Acline94/Electrolyte imbalance/Gklap Peer Review

Peer review

General info

• Whose work are you reviewing? User:Acline94
• Link to draft you're reviewing: Electrolyte imbalance

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? Yes
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes - it does not specifically address the types of electrolyte imbalances that make up the article but I think that is fine for the intro
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes - some topics mentioned in the lead such as non-sodium related imbalances are not included below in the body of the article
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Lead evaluation

Overall the lead is well written. It gives an overarching view of the article without being too specific and bogged with details. The last 3 sentences do include specific cases (i.e. bulimia, refeeding syndrome) that might make more sense if they were moved to the body of the article or at least elaborated upon there.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes
• Is the content added up-to-date? Yes
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes - missing content

Content evaluation

The content that is included is well written and on topic for the article. To round out the article, more content should be added on other types of electrolyte imbalances (i.e. hyponatremia, hypercalcemia, hyperkalemia, etc.). As mentioned above, it would also be useful to include some specific diseases / cases that pertain to electrolyte imbalances (i.e. bulimia, refeeding syndrome) in the body of the article.

- Information included in the 2nd paragraph under General Function header may be more appropriate to include in the lead or piecemeal as you address the different types of electrolyte imbalances.

- Would edit the following sentence to account for the different permutations of both volume status (hyper and hypovolemia) has well as electrolyte status (hyper and hyponatremia).

"However, if the electrolyte involved is sodium, the issue is not a deficiency of sodium, but rather a water excess, causing the imbalance."

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added neutral? Yes
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
• Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation

The tone and balance are appropriate. The article is primarily based on well regarded textbooks and review articles. Basic electrolyte management is not a particularly controversial topic in medicine so there are generally not major disputes on this topic.

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
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation

The sources and references are up to date and appropriate. The main sources are review articles and textbooks.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
• 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

Organization evaluation

The organization is logical. The causes, symptoms, treatment sub-headers are a nice way to organize each electrolyte disorder.

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
• Are images well-captioned?
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation

N/A - no images in this article

For New Articles Only

If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.

• Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
• How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
• Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
• Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

New Article Evaluation

N/A - this is not a new article

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

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

Overall evaluation

The article is well written, and the content that was added is appropriate. The section on hypernatremia is well organized. As mentioned above, the article needs to be longer. There are other electrolyte imbalances that need to be included for this article to be complete.

~~~~~