Talk:Surgical smoke

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 January 2021 and 3 February 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Medstudent2021. Peer reviewers: Chinnerj.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review Feedback

• Check for readability: This article is overall understandable and uses language that is appropriate for non-medical readers. I might suggest some adjustments to wording and sentence structure to ensure that these factors don't inhibit comprehension. For example, the sentences "Surgical smoke, as a health threat to those exposed to it, has become a growing concern. Studies have demonstrated, depending on several factors, it may contain carcinogens, mutagens, ...." could be changed to the following: "Exposure to surgical smoke has become a growing health concern for medical professionals. Studies have demonstrated that it may contain carcinogens, mutagens, ......". Other sentences can be similarly restructured to maintain readability.
• Adherence to topic / Not getting off track: This article does a nice job of avoiding tangents and staying on the topic at hand. I didn't not any major concerns in this area.
• Organization & Flow: The article is well-organized into three different sections, with good flow from one to the next. For flow within sentences and paragraphs, see notes under the "readability" bullet point.
• Use of images and figures: Nice image demonstrating the use of an electrocautery device during surgery. Other images are optional, but a picture of a smoke evacuation device mentioned in the third section might add interest to the article.
• Proper use of citations: In-text citations and the reference section appears to be properly organized and implemented. I'm unsure if the note at the end of the first section "read more on [1]" is appropriate for Wikipedia.
• Paraphrasing: appropriate language was used throughout the article
• Quality Sources, i.e. resources open to the public: All articles appear too be from reputable sources (e.g. medical societies) and were easily accessible.
• Check for bias and equal-sided arguments: no bias noted in the article.
• Provide productive and professional critique: Overall, this is a very informative article with good references and a solid discussion of the health concerns related to surgical smoke exposure. I believe the main area of improvement would be sentence structure and flow within the article to make it more readable and polished. Otherwise, the article content is great!

ObgynGirl28 (talk) 21:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC)