Talk:Deconditioning

Wiki Education assignment: 2025-26 TCOM WikiMed

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 March 2026 and 28 March 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jwin026 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: DaftTrousers.

— Assignment last updated by Butterchicken228 (talk) 01:18, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Workplan

I intend to improve this article by expanding upon the content of deconditioning related to the medical field through research of free and easily accessible resources like PubMed and Google Scholars. By adding more content, this will allow me to create further organization for the reader by adding sections into the article. I also intend to improve the article by creating a better lead section that encapsulates the topic better. I will make sure to write this article in laymen’s terms for the common reader and hopefully add publicly available images for the reader to contextualize the content better. Jwin026 (talk) 17:45, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Peer Review

Lead

The lead is very well written, and can be easily understood by someone who is not in the medical field. It contains an introductory sentence that clearly and concisely described the topic. While I have a clear understanding of how the syndrome can lead to other medical conditions, perhaps the lead would also benefit from a brief mentions of signs and symptoms. It is appropriately concise, as I see you go into more detail in other sections of the article.

Content

All content added, including signs, symptoms, causes, and treatments are very relevant to communicating the overall nature of deconditioning. All content appears to be up to date, after verifying with AMBOSS. The article may benefit from an additional section at the very end that delves into related medical disorders, as it is something that is mentioned near the ned of your lead paragraph. I believe the article does address a historically underrepresented topic, as we all have a layman understanding of deconditioning, but would benefit from knowing specific signs and prognosis.

Tone and Balance

The content added is neutral, and I didn’t see any claims that were biased towards a specific position. I would reiterate and say that because you mentioned how deconditioning relates to other medical disorders in the lead, by not discussing that at the end of the article, you paint an ambiguous picture of nature of the disorders’ relationship.

Sources and References

All new content was backed by reliable secondary sources of information, and I appreciated how you also had linked other articles within what you added to the article. The content does appear to reflect what the sources say, as the sources are neutral accounts of what deconditioning comprises. From what I can see, the sources are thorough but quite a few are from the early 2000’s and you may benefit from having some more research from the last 5 years.

Organization

The content that you added is concise, clear and easy to read. I would add a little bit more information in the treatment section, as you talk about recovery time but readers wouldn’t understand the best ways to recover. I didn’t notices any grammar or spelling errors, and found the sub-headings made it easy to navigate the continent.

Images and Media

I appreciate the information box that you made at the start of the article as it surmises the clinical presentation of deconditioning in an easy to understand way.  The article could benefit from an image, though that’s up to your discretion and isn’t necessary. DaftTrousers (talk) 20:22, 19 March 2026 (UTC)