 | Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
Sumatropin
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- Anorectal disorder
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Anorectal disorder
Lead
Lead
The lead provides a basic summary of defining what may fall into anorectal disorders. It is updated to include diagnoses that are then explored in further detail below. The lead is concise so readers will know that disorders fall into the category if they involve the anorectal junction. The lead lacks descriptions of the major sections and could include a summary of what kind of symptoms patients may experience. It is easy to jump to the symptoms and signs on the page, so I think the conciseness of the lead works well with the article. It is not too detailed and seems appropriate for the length of the page.
Content
A chart with details on condition, symptoms and signs, diagnosis, treatment, and images were added for a few of the anorectal disorders. The is relevant to the topic and links to further detail on each condition's respective page. The resources are up to date with two resources from 2022 and within the last 10 years. The sources appear to be thorough with information coming from Anorectal and Colonic Diseases: A Practical guide to their management and Clinics in Colon and rectal surgery. This offers a perspective of clinical management and surgical management. No historically underrepresented populations or topics were addressed.
Tone and Balance
The content added is neutral and offers standard information that patients, clinicians, or student learners can gain quickly. There are not biases that I picked up on, the author adds non-surgical and surgical options. There is a lot of detail on the non-surgical options, but a suggestion would be to expand on the hemorrhoids surgical options. There does not seem to be viewpoints that are under or overrepresented and doesn't attempt to persuade the reader in favor or any position. The tone is overall neutral.
Sources and Resources
The content is backed up by peer-reviewed journals that are reliable. Most of the sources are within 10 years and several are from 2022. One sources is from 2011 and 2009 but up to date sources are well-represented. The sources seem to be written by a diverse spectrum of authors from surgical and clinical perspectives. The links that I clicked on worked and took me to the source pages.
Organization
The content is well-written and I did not identify any grammatical or spelling errors. The organization is really visually appealing and easy to understand because the information was entered into a chart that is broken down into different sections.
Images and Media
There are images that were added for hemorrhoids, anal tears and fissures, and anorectal abscess and fistulas. The images are captioned with short text that could be expanded on if the author chose. For instance abscess locations depicts the locations but the text could also include all the locations (supralevator, intersphinteric, ischiorectal, etc). They seem to adhere to the copyright regulations and are laid out in a visually appealing way within the chart.
| Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
Sumatropin
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- Anorectal disorder
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Anorectal disorder
Lead
Lead
The lead provides a basic summary of defining what may fall into anorectal disorders. It is updated to include diagnoses that are then explored in further detail below. The lead is concise so readers will know that disorders fall into the category if they involve the anorectal junction. The lead lacks descriptions of the major sections and could include a summary of what kind of symptoms patients may experience. It is easy to jump to the symptoms and signs on the page, so I think the conciseness of the lead works well with the article. It is not too detailed and seems appropriate for the length of the page.
Content
A chart with details on condition, symptoms and signs, diagnosis, treatment, and images were added for a few of the anorectal disorders. The is relevant to the topic and links to further detail on each condition's respective page. The resources are up to date with two resources from 2022 and within the last 10 years. The sources appear to be thorough with information coming from Anorectal and Colonic Diseases: A Practical guide to their management and Clinics in Colon and rectal surgery. This offers a perspective of clinical management and surgical management. No historically underrepresented populations or topics were addressed.
Tone and Balance
The content added is neutral and offers standard information that patients, clinicians, or student learners can gain quickly. There are not biases that I picked up on, the author adds non-surgical and surgical options. There is a lot of detail on the non-surgical options, but a suggestion would be to expand on the hemorrhoids surgical options. There does not seem to be viewpoints that are under or overrepresented and doesn't attempt to persuade the reader in favor or any position. The tone is overall neutral.
Sources and Resources
The content is backed up by peer-reviewed journals that are reliable. Most of the sources are within 10 years and several are from 2022. One sources is from 2011 and 2009 but up to date sources are well-represented. The sources seem to be written by a diverse spectrum of authors from surgical and clinical perspectives. The links that I clicked on worked and took me to the source pages.
Organization
The content is well-written and I did not identify any grammatical or spelling errors. The organization is really visually appealing and easy to understand because the information was entered into a chart that is broken down into different sections.
Images and Media
There are images that were added for hemorrhoids, anal tears and fissures, and anorectal abscess and fistulas. The images are captioned with short text that could be expanded on if the author chose. For instance abscess locations depicts the locations but the text could also include all the locations (supralevator, intersphinteric, ischiorectal, etc). They seem to adhere to the copyright regulations and are laid out in a visually appealing way within the chart.