I can help you identify sources if you need help finding them please message me at my talk page Forgive me for being critical on the article but right now I see the sentence A Harvard University study concluded the impact of interstitial cystitis on quality of life is severe and debilitating  in the lead I dont know of a reason to name drop Harvard like this see WPMEDREV Tha paper is from  and is a primary research paper Per WPMEDDATE we try to use recent review articles if possible I see it has been cited by three review articles The most recent is PMID  Clinical guidelines for interstitial cystitis and hypersensitive bladder syndrome That would be a good source to rewrite content with And then we have A Harvard Medical School guide which sounds like further name dropping and it is cited to a teriary source which is not ideal in this case A clinical practice guideline is one type of secondary WPMEDRS and review articles are another These should be cited for most of the content in a medical article when they can be located I came here because I noticed this article was put up for good article review In my opinion it lacks basic verifiability because it is tagged as having potentially self published material and in general strays from the guideline of WPMEDRS by citing questionable sources such as old primary research For example the statement Neuromodulation can be successful in treating ICBPS symptoms including pain is cited to a  paper Thats not how we write articles unfortunately