Review article: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:39, 24 May 2022

A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline.^[1]^[2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies. It resembles a survey article or, in news publishing, overview article, which also surveys and summarizes previously published primary and secondary sources, instead of reporting new facts and results. Survey articles are however considered tertiary sources, since they do not provide additional analysis and synthesis of new conclusions. A review of such sources is often referred to as a tertiary review.

Academic publications that specialize in review articles are known as review journals.

Review articles teach about:

the main people working in a field
recent major advances and discoveries
significant gaps in the research
current debates
ideas of where research might go next

A meta-study summarizes a large number of already published experimental or epidemiological studies and provides statistical analysis of their result.

Relevance within academic literature

A key aim of review articles is to pose other potential avenues of research, stating the limitations of the empirical studies under review and how future studies of the same nature can be improved.^[2] They also present findings of other studies within the same discipline, comparing results and drawing conclusions based on each individual finding.^[3] Essentially, they are an evaluation of already published academic research.

It is important that review articles do not introduce new results, but rather, reiterate existing results. However, they are able to draw conclusions on the results presented (within reason).^[4] Review articles hold importance as they forecast to see new research opportunities by synthesising the existing research and identifying gaps in this research.^[5] They were born out of the necessity to categorise and make sense of the ongoing plethora of research publications being released annually. Between 1991 and 2008, there were forty times more papers published within the field of biodiversity alone.^[6] This overload of research papers makes it difficult for scientists and clinicians to remain up to date on current findings and developments within their discipline.

Structure of a review article

Review articles initially identify the scope and aim.^[7] If submitting the review article to a journal, the author must familiarise themselves with the theme of the journal as well as its conditions for submission. Some journals only accept review articles whereas others strictly publish original research.^[11] Once the scope of the journal the author intends to submit to is identified, then identify the own personal scope and aim for the article. Experienced author, Angus Crake emphasises the need to define a scope that is “manageable, not too large or small” and to “focus on recent advances if the field is well established”. This equates to a succinct, refreshing review article that adds a new perspective to the field whilst still being grounded in academia.

When finding sources, it is ideal to search through multiple databases and search engines. This ensures a wide berth of knowledge that presents multiple perspectives and allows for a reasonably balanced article. Some disciplines encourage the use of certain search engines. For example, science-based review articles heavily utilise Medline, Embase and CINAHL.

The title, abstract and keywords chosen bring awareness to the audience of the article, and should describe what the article is about. Search engine optimisation is important when publishing articles within a discipline where the literature is already saturated.

Like most academic articles, a review article includes an ‘abstract’ at the start. The ‘Abstract’ section of the review article should include: a synopsis of the topic being discussed or the issue studied, an overview of the study participants used in the empirical study being reviewed, a discussion of the results found and conclusions drawn by the scholars conducting the study, an explanation of how such findings have already or could potentially impact the theory and practice within the relevant discipline.^[12] Within this section, context and the relevance of the review is included. The jargon used will depend on the intended audience.

The discussion section of the article presents multiple perspectives, stating limitations and potential extensions of the study being reviewed.^[7] Also, within this section, similarities and dissonances among studies are stated.

The presentation of both the shortcomings and advancements of the research papers under review is important for comprehensiveness.^[7] Daft (1985, p 198) emphasised this by saying “Previous work is always vulnerable. Criticising is easy, and of little value; it is more important to explain how research builds upon previous findings rather than to claim previous research is inadequate and incompetent."^[13] Within this section of the review article is the suggestion of improvements and areas to further extend the research in reference.^[14] The bibliography included at the end of review articles is equally important as it leads to further information on the study being discussed and is a way for academics and students alike to further their research. These are secondary sources.^[5] Meyers and Sinding say,

“... The review selects from these (research) papers, juxtaposes them, and puts them in a narrative that holds them together… clearly the best reviews are not only concerned with what was done in the past, but also present a means to sculpt the future.”^[4]

Method of research

Programs such as Papers, EndNote, and Adobe Illustrator are useful for when it comes to actually structuring and writing your review article.^[15]

Difference from a research article

Research articles form the basis of review articles. Review articles use the original information presented in research articles to draw conclusions and pose suggestions for future research.^[16]

Research and empirical articles are reporting the results of the author's study, thereby deeming it a primary source. They often include raw data and statistics, using the words “participants”, “sample”, “subjects”, and “experiment” frequently throughout. Review articles are academic but are not empirical. As opposed to presenting the results of a study (which would be a research article), review articles evaluate the results of already published studies.^[17]

A research article presents original information from the perspective of the author, whereas a review article analyses that statement and information.
A research article presents original content, whereas a review article synthesises that content and makes sense of it within the context of the discipline.
A research article has more narrow parameters on what is included (often depending on the journal it is being pitched to), whereas a review article is more open, being able to incorporate multiple research papers albeit still being contained within journal guidelines.^[18]

Academic publishing

Review articles in academic journals analyze or discuss research previously published by others, rather than reporting new experimental results.^[19]^[16] An expert's opinion is valuable, but an expert's assessment of the literature can be more valuable. When reading individual articles, readers could miss features that are apparent to an expert clinician-researcher. Readers benefit from the expert's explanation and assessment of the validity and applicability of individual studies.^[20]

Review articles come in the form of literature reviews and, more specifically, systematic reviews; both are a form of secondary literature.^[21] Literature reviews provide a summary of what the authors believe are the best and most relevant prior publications. Systematic reviews determine an objective list of criteria, and find all previously published original papers that meet the criteria; they then compare the results presented in these papers.

Some academic journals likewise specialize in review of a field; they are known as review journals.

The concept of "review article" is separate from the concept of peer-reviewed literature. A review article, even one that is requested or "peer-invited", will be either peer-reviewed or non-peer-reviewed depending on how submissions are treated.^[22]^[23]

Writing review articles can be a popular task among students. At times, teachers from schools and universities assign this task^[24]

Impact

According to a 2021 study in the American Sociological Review, "papers cited by formal review articles generally experience a dramatic loss in future citations. Typically, the review gets cited instead of the specific articles mentioned in the review." The study identifies an exception to this trend: articles that are characterized by the review as being bridges between clusters of scholarship tend to get disproportionate future attention.^[25] An analysis was conducted by McAlister et al. of review articles in six different medical journals. Of the six journals, less than 25% included a description, evaluation, or synthesis of evidence that had been provided. Only one-third of the articles had a clinical topic at the forefront, and only half of the articles presented quantitative data that support the suggestions made at the end of the piece.

Historically, review journals have a higher impact than primary research journals.^[26] The year 2006 showed the top 10 most impactful journals to be compiled exclusively of review articles. In addition to this, review articles are cited more frequently than research articles.^[27] There are currently no studies commenting on the effect of review articles on the impactfullness of journals that usually only publish research papers. This prevents one from saying with certainty that review articles could replace original research papers in large journals. Of the 538 review articles published in pathology journals within the year 2005, a mere 21% of them have been cited over ten times following their issuance. Furthermore, in a 2000-2006 comparison of journals; The American Journal of Pathology, The Journal of Pathology, and Laboratory Investigation, published both with and without review articles included, it was found that journals published with review articles had a greater impact on readers than those that did not include review articles.^[28]

In terms of the growth of review articles, the rate has been exponential.^[29] The number of papers on the topic of ‘pathology’ has increased 2.3 times between the years 1991 to 2006. Within the science discipline, the number of review articles in the Science Citation Index increased from 14,815 to 45,829 between 1991 and 2005. Following the same trend, the number of dedicated review journals within the Science Citation Index database grew from 163 to 198 between 1999 and 2006. Although, the percentage of review articles in review journals that formed the foundation of review literature decreased by 17% between 1999 and 2005.^[30] This indicates that most review articles are being allocated to original research journals as opposed to strictly review journals. This is also dependent on the quality of the review articles published.

Separate to the quality of articles, the number of review articles published poses its own challenge to those searching for succinct but comprehensive research analysis. This makes it equally as difficult for experts to navigate through the synthesised review articles as it is to sift through the primary research itself. Additionally, the inclusion of poorly referenced, inadequately researched, and overly biased review articles serve to muddy the water and make it even harder to determine quality writing.^[17]

Following the release of the ‘Handbook of Research Synthesis’, the use of review articles within the social, behavioural and health science disciplines has proliferated. 2007 statistics showed that systematic review articles were produced at a rate of 2,500 per year on the MEDLINE platform (Moher et al., 2007). The increased in prevalence of review articles within these disciplines can be attributed to the pull towards “evidence-based practice”. This term was coined by Sackett (2000) and refers to the combination of available research, practitioner expertise, and consumer values. Due to the inundation of original research in the field, there is a need for review articles which highlight relevant studies, results and trends.^[7] The varying methods and participants used among original research studies can provide inconsistent results, thereby presenting a challenge in synthesising information using one common metric. The conjunction of meta-analyses and systematic reviews has proven to be more effective in organising data and drawing conclusions, especially when it comes to clinical trials within the medical field.^[31]

Peer review process

The process of review articles being peer-reviewed is critical to their credibility.^[12] The peer review process is a way to ensure the article is as polished and accurate as possible. Most often, those reviewing the article are fellow academics or experts within the field under discussion in the paper. Sending out a peer review allows for gaps in the paper to be acknowledged so that the review can be as well-informed and comprehensive as possible. Peers will often recommend other research articles and studies to be included in the review, which can add strength to the article. Confusion amongst peers also indicates that your paper is not clear or lacking synergy.^[32]

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

The Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS) is a highly acclaimed peer-reviewed journal for the marketing discipline. It aims for 10%-20% of published content to be review articles, which is indicative of the value they add to journals. A 2012-2016 Financial Times analysis of the top six marketing journals found that JAMS attracted the most papers, publishing 31% of all review articles. The number of papers published per year in JAMS has increased from 40 to 60, allowing for an additional 8-10 review articles to be accepted annually, and thereby highlighting the growth in popularity of review articles.^[7]

This particular marketing journal established the ‘Review Paper Editorial Initiative’. This initiative encompasses a system in which the authors of peer review articles submit a detailed proposal of their paper, outlining key figures as well as a description of the process they undertook or are planning on undertaking for their review article. From this proposal, JAMS may grant an assurance that the paper will be accepted into the journal given that the final product is executed as detailed in the proposal. This instils confidence in authors and academics aiming to write and publish review articles within a saturated field. It also encourages papers to be written within areas that need further synthesis and research.^[7]

References

^ "What's a "Review Article?"". The University of Texas. Archived from the original on 4 June 2011. Retrieved 8 June 2011.
^ ^a ^b Jerrells, Thomas R (2000-11-01). "Why publish review articles? Why write review articles for publication?". Alcohol. 22 (3): 121–122. doi:10.1016/S0741-8329(00)00123-3. ISSN 0741-8329.
^ "What's the difference between a research article and a review article? - LibAnswers". jwu-ri.libanswers.com. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ ^a ^b "How to write a review article | Writing your paper". Author Services. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ ^a ^b Morgan, Randa Lopez. "Research Guides: NFS 4021 Contemporary Topics in Nutrition: Research Articles vs Review Articles". guides.lib.lsu.edu. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ Pautasso, Marco (2013-07-18). "Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review". PLOS Computational Biology. 9 (7): e1003149. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149. ISSN 1553-7358. PMC 3715443. PMID 23874189.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g Palmatier, Robert W.; Houston, Mark B.; Hulland, John (2018-01-01). "Review articles: purpose, process, and structure". Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 46 (1): 1–5. doi:10.1007/s11747-017-0563-4. ISSN 1552-7824.
^ ^a ^b ^c Barczak, Gloria (2017-01-17). "Writing a Review Article". Journal of Product Innovation Management. 34 (2): 120–121. doi:10.1111/jpim.12365. ISSN 0737-6782.
^ ^a ^b ^c Littell, Julia H.; Corcoran, Jacqueline; Pillai, Vijayan (2008-03-13). Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-532654-3.
^ "Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, version 6.3". Cochrane Library. February 2022. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)
^ Rajendra Kale (2006). "What do Editors of General Medical Journals Want?". Proceedings of the Workshop on Publishing for Biomedical Journal Editors and Reviewers. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Department of Biomedical Imaging, University of Malaya. doi:10.2349/biij.2.4.e54-8.
^ ^a ^b Ehrlich, Claire. "MVCC Libraries: Identify Types of Academic Journal Articles: Literature Reviews". mvcc.libguides.com. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ Webster, Jane; Watson, Richard T. (2002). "Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review". MIS Quarterly. 26 (2): xiii–xxiii. ISSN 0276-7783.
^ "How to write a review article | Writing your paper". Author Services. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ "Tips for writing your first scientific literature review article". www.asbmb.org. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ ^a ^b Brooks-Tatum, Shanesha R. F. (2012-02-01). "Delaware State University Guides Patrons into more Effective Research with Standardized Lib Guides". Against the Grain. 24 (1). doi:10.7771/2380-176x.6077. ISSN 2380-176X.
^ ^a ^b "What's the difference between a research article and a review article? - LibAnswers". jwu-ri.libanswers.com. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ Young, Suzanne (2022-02-16), "Writing Up and Presenting Your Dissertation", How to Write Your Undergraduate Dissertation in Criminology, London: Routledge, pp. 111–123, retrieved 2022-05-10
^ John Siegel. "Have I Found A Scholarly Article?". Archived from the original on 2013-01-28.
^ "Engaging Medical Librarians to Improve the Quality of Review Articles". JAMA. 312 (10): 999–1000. September 10, 2014. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.648.3777. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.9263. PMID 25203078. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)
^ "Scientific Literature". The Regents of the University of California.
^ Durham, William H. (October 2004). "Preface: A "Peer-Invited" Publication". Annual Review of Anthropology. 33 (1): annurev.an.33.090204.100001. doi:10.1146/annurev.an.33.090204.100001. Retrieved 21 September 2021.
^ Deborah E. De Lange (2011). Research Companion to Green International Management Studies: A Guide for Future Research, Collaboration and Review Writing. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 1–5. ISBN 978-1-84980-727-2.
^ "Article Review Writing".
^ McMahan, Peter; McFarland, Daniel A. (2021). "Creative Destruction: The Structural Consequences of Scientific Curation". American Sociological Review. 86 (2): 341–376. doi:10.1177/0003122421996323. ISSN 0003-1224.
^ Roth, Kevin A. (April 2007). "What IF? Does Impact Factor Really Matter?". Journal of Histochemistry & Cytochemistry. 55 (4): 313–314. doi:10.1369/jhc.7E7201.2007. ISSN 0022-1554.
^ "LISTSERV 16.5 - Archives - Error". listserv.utk.edu. Retrieved 2022-05-10.
^ Ketcham, Catherine M.; Crawford, James M. (December 2007). "The impact of review articles". Laboratory Investigation. 87 (12): 1174–1185. doi:10.1038/labinvest.3700688. ISSN 1530-0307.
^ Smoller, Bruce R. (June 2006). "Impact factor: certainly a factor, but just whom does it impact? Important lessons from another discipline". Journal of Cutaneous Pathology. 33 (6): 458–461. doi:10.1111/j.0303-6987.2006.00340.x. ISSN 0303-6987.
^ Rajendra Kale (2006). "What do Editors of General Medical Journals Want?". Proceedings of the Workshop on Publishing for Biomedical Journal Editors and Reviewers. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Department of Biomedical Imaging, University of Malaya. doi:10.2349/biij.2.4.e54-8.
^ Littell, Julia H.; Corcoran, Jacqueline; Pillai, Vijayan (2008-03-13). Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-532654-3.
^ Tschirhart, Lori. "Research Guides: Publishing in the Sciences: How to Write a Scientific Literature Review". guides.lib.umich.edu. Retrieved 2022-05-10.

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 {{Research}}
-A '''review article''' is an [[article (publishing)|article]] that summarizes the current [[Status quaestionis|state of understanding]] on a topic within a certain discipline.<ref>{{cite web|title=What's a "Review Article?"|url=http://www.lib.utexas.edu/lsl/help/modules/review.html|work=The University of Texas|access-date=8 June 2011|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604191438/http://www.lib.utexas.edu/lsl/help/modules/review.html|archive-date=4 June 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Jerrells |first=Thomas R |date=2000-11-01 |title=Why publish review articles? Why write review articles for publication? |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0741832900001233 |journal=Alcohol |language=en |volume=22 |issue=3 |pages=121–122 |doi=10.1016/S0741-8329(00)00123-3 |issn=0741-8329}}</ref> A review article is generally considered a [[secondary source]] since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies. It resembles a '''survey article''' or, in news publishing, '''overview article''', which also surveys and summarizes previously published [[primary source|primary]] and [[secondary source]]s, instead of reporting new facts and results. Survey articles are however considered [[tertiary sources]], since they do not provide additional analysis and synthesis of new conclusions. A review of such sources is often referred to as a [[tertiary review]].
+A '''review article''' is an [[article (publishing)|article]] that summarizes the current [[Status quaestionis|state of understanding]] on a topic within a certain discipline.<ref>{{cite web|title=What's a "Review Article?"|url=http://www.lib.utexas.edu/lsl/help/modules/review.html|work=The University of Texas|access-date=8 June 2011|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604191438/http://www.lib.utexas.edu/lsl/help/modules/review.html|archive-date=4 June 2011}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last=Jerrells |first=Thomas R |date=2000-11-01 |title=Why publish review articles? Why write review articles for publication? |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0741832900001233 |journal=Alcohol |language=en |volume=22 |issue=3 |pages=121–122 |doi=10.1016/S0741-8329(00)00123-3 |issn=0741-8329}}</ref> A review article is generally considered a [[secondary source]] since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies. It resembles a '''survey article''' or, in news publishing, '''overview article''', which also surveys and summarizes previously published [[primary source|primary]] and [[secondary source]]s, instead of reporting new facts and results. Survey articles are however considered [[tertiary sources]], since they do not provide additional analysis and synthesis of new conclusions. A review of such sources is often referred to as a [[tertiary review]].
 Academic publications that specialize in review articles are known as review journals.
@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 == Relevance within academic literature ==
-A key aim of review articles is to pose other potential avenues of research, stating the limitations of the [[Empirical research|empirical studies]] under review and how future studies of the same nature can be improved.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Jerrells |first=Thomas R |date=2000-11-01 |title=Why publish review articles? Why write review articles for publication? |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0741832900001233 |journal=Alcohol |language=en |volume=22 |issue=3 |pages=121–122 |doi=10.1016/S0741-8329(00)00123-3 |issn=0741-8329}}</ref> They also present findings of other studies within the same discipline, comparing results and drawing conclusions based on each individual finding.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What's the difference between a research article and a review article? - LibAnswers |url=https://jwu-ri.libanswers.com/faq/141979 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=jwu-ri.libanswers.com}}</ref> Essentially, they are an evaluation of already published academic research.
+A key aim of review articles is to pose other potential avenues of research, stating the limitations of the [[Empirical research|empirical studies]] under review and how future studies of the same nature can be improved.<ref name=":0" /> They also present findings of other studies within the same discipline, comparing results and drawing conclusions based on each individual finding.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What's the difference between a research article and a review article? - LibAnswers |url=https://jwu-ri.libanswers.com/faq/141979 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=jwu-ri.libanswers.com}}</ref> Essentially, they are an evaluation of already published academic research.
-It is important that review articles do not introduce new results, but rather, reiterate existing results. However, they are able to draw conclusions on the results presented (within reason).<ref>{{Cite web |title=How to write a review article {{!}} Writing your paper |url=https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/writing-your-paper/how-to-write-review-article/ |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=Author Services |language=en-GB}}</ref> Review articles hold importance as they forecast to see new research opportunities by synthesising the existing research and identifying gaps in this research.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Morgan |first=Randa Lopez |title=Research Guides: NFS 4021 Contemporary Topics in Nutrition: Research Articles vs Review Articles |url=https://guides.lib.lsu.edu/c.php?g=376856&p=2550574 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=guides.lib.lsu.edu |language=en}}</ref> They were born out of the necessity to categorise and make sense of the ongoing plethora of research publications being released annually. Between 1991 and 2008, there were forty times more papers published within the field of biodiversity alone.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pautasso |first=Marco |date=2013-07-18 |title=Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review |url=https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149 |journal=PLOS Computational Biology |language=en |volume=9 |issue=7 |pages=e1003149 |doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149 |issn=1553-7358 |pmc=3715443 |pmid=23874189}}</ref> This overload of research papers makes it difficult for scientists and clinicians to remain up to date on current findings and developments within their discipline.
+It is important that review articles do not introduce new results, but rather, reiterate existing results. However, they are able to draw conclusions on the results presented (within reason).<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=How to write a review article {{!}} Writing your paper |url=https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/writing-your-paper/how-to-write-review-article/ |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=Author Services |language=en-GB}}</ref> Review articles hold importance as they forecast to see new research opportunities by synthesising the existing research and identifying gaps in this research.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=Morgan |first=Randa Lopez |title=Research Guides: NFS 4021 Contemporary Topics in Nutrition: Research Articles vs Review Articles |url=https://guides.lib.lsu.edu/c.php?g=376856&p=2550574 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=guides.lib.lsu.edu |language=en}}</ref> They were born out of the necessity to categorise and make sense of the ongoing plethora of research publications being released annually. Between 1991 and 2008, there were forty times more papers published within the field of biodiversity alone.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pautasso |first=Marco |date=2013-07-18 |title=Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review |url=https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149 |journal=PLOS Computational Biology |language=en |volume=9 |issue=7 |pages=e1003149 |doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149 |issn=1553-7358 |pmc=3715443 |pmid=23874189}}</ref> This overload of research papers makes it difficult for scientists and clinicians to remain up to date on current findings and developments within their discipline.
 == Categories ==
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 The title, abstract and keywords chosen bring awareness to the audience of the article, and should describe what the article is about. [[Search engine optimization|Search engine optimisation]] is important when publishing articles within a discipline where the literature is already saturated.
-Like most academic articles, a review article includes an ‘[[Abstract (summary)|abstract’]] at the start. The ‘Abstract’ section of the review article should include: a synopsis of the topic being discussed or the issue studied, an overview of the study participants used in the empirical study being reviewed, a discussion of the results found and conclusions drawn by the scholars conducting the study, an explanation of how such findings have already or could potentially impact the theory and practice within the relevant discipline.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Ehrlich |first=Claire |title=MVCC Libraries: Identify Types of Academic Journal Articles: Literature Reviews |url=https://mvcc.libguides.com/scientific_journal/litreview |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=mvcc.libguides.com |language=en}}</ref> Within this section, context and the relevance of the review is included. The jargon used will depend on the intended audience.
+Like most academic articles, a review article includes an ‘[[Abstract (summary)|abstract’]] at the start. The ‘Abstract’ section of the review article should include: a synopsis of the topic being discussed or the issue studied, an overview of the study participants used in the empirical study being reviewed, a discussion of the results found and conclusions drawn by the scholars conducting the study, an explanation of how such findings have already or could potentially impact the theory and practice within the relevant discipline.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Ehrlich |first=Claire |title=MVCC Libraries: Identify Types of Academic Journal Articles: Literature Reviews |url=https://mvcc.libguides.com/scientific_journal/litreview |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=mvcc.libguides.com |language=en}}</ref> Within this section, context and the relevance of the review is included. The jargon used will depend on the intended audience.
 The discussion section of the article presents multiple perspectives, stating limitations and potential extensions of the study being reviewed.<ref name=palm/> Also, within this section, similarities and dissonances among studies are stated.
 The presentation of both the shortcomings and advancements of the research papers under review is important for comprehensiveness.<ref name=palm/> Daft (1985, p 198) emphasised this by saying “''Previous work is always vulnerable. Criticising is easy, and of little value; it is more important to explain how research builds upon previous findings rather than to claim previous research is inadequate and incompetent."''<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Webster |first=Jane |last2=Watson |first2=Richard T. |date=2002 |title=Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4132319 |journal=MIS Quarterly |volume=26 |issue=2 |pages=xiii–xxiii |issn=0276-7783}}</ref>
-Within this section of the review article is the suggestion of improvements and areas to further extend the research in reference.<ref>{{Cite web |title=How to write a review article {{!}} Writing your paper |url=https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/writing-your-paper/how-to-write-review-article/ |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=Author Services |language=en-GB}}</ref> The bibliography included at the end of review articles is equally important as it leads to further information on the study being discussed and is a way for academics and students alike to further their research. These are [[secondary source]]s.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What's the difference between a research article and a review article? - LibAnswers |url=https://jwu-ri.libanswers.com/faq/141979 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=jwu-ri.libanswers.com}}</ref> Meyers and Sinding say,
+Within this section of the review article is the suggestion of improvements and areas to further extend the research in reference.<ref>{{Cite web |title=How to write a review article {{!}} Writing your paper |url=https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/writing-your-paper/how-to-write-review-article/ |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=Author Services |language=en-GB}}</ref> The bibliography included at the end of review articles is equally important as it leads to further information on the study being discussed and is a way for academics and students alike to further their research. These are [[secondary source]]s.<ref name=":2" /> Meyers and Sinding say,
-“''... The review selects from these (research) papers, juxtaposes them, and puts them in a narrative that holds them together… clearly the best reviews are not only concerned with what was done in the past, but also present a means to sculpt the future.”''<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ketcham |first=Catherine M. |last2=Crawford |first2=James M. |date=December 2007 |title=The impact of review articles |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/3700688 |journal=Laboratory Investigation |language=en |volume=87 |issue=12 |pages=1174–1185 |doi=10.1038/labinvest.3700688 |issn=1530-0307}}</ref>
+“''... The review selects from these (research) papers, juxtaposes them, and puts them in a narrative that holds them together… clearly the best reviews are not only concerned with what was done in the past, but also present a means to sculpt the future.”<ref name=":1" />''
 == Method of research ==
@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 == Difference from a research article ==
-[[Research article]]s form the basis of review articles. Review articles use the original information presented in research articles to draw conclusions and pose suggestions for future research.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Brooks-Tatum |first=Shanesha R. F. |date=2012-02-01 |title=Delaware State University Guides Patrons into more Effective Research with Standardized Lib Guides |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/2380-176x.6077 |journal=Against the Grain |volume=24 |issue=1 |doi=10.7771/2380-176x.6077 |issn=2380-176X}}</ref>
+[[Research article]]s form the basis of review articles. Review articles use the original information presented in research articles to draw conclusions and pose suggestions for future research.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal |last=Brooks-Tatum |first=Shanesha R. F. |date=2012-02-01 |title=Delaware State University Guides Patrons into more Effective Research with Standardized Lib Guides |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/2380-176x.6077 |journal=Against the Grain |volume=24 |issue=1 |doi=10.7771/2380-176x.6077 |issn=2380-176X}}</ref>
-Research and empirical articles are reporting the results of the author's study, thereby deeming it a [[primary source]]. They often include raw data and statistics, using the words “participants”, “sample”, “subjects”, and “experiment” frequently throughout. Review articles are academic but are not [[Empirical evidence|empirical]]. As opposed to ''presenting'' the results of a study (which would be a [[Academic publishing#Scholarly paper|research article]]), review articles ''evaluate'' the results of already published studies.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What's the difference between a research article and a review article? - LibAnswers |url=https://jwu-ri.libanswers.com/faq/141979 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=jwu-ri.libanswers.com}}</ref>
+Research and empirical articles are reporting the results of the author's study, thereby deeming it a [[primary source]]. They often include raw data and statistics, using the words “participants”, “sample”, “subjects”, and “experiment” frequently throughout. Review articles are academic but are not [[Empirical evidence|empirical]]. As opposed to ''presenting'' the results of a study (which would be a [[Academic publishing#Scholarly paper|research article]]), review articles ''evaluate'' the results of already published studies.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |title=What's the difference between a research article and a review article? - LibAnswers |url=https://jwu-ri.libanswers.com/faq/141979 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=jwu-ri.libanswers.com}}</ref>
 [[File:Main differences between review article and research article.png|thumb|Key differences between review articles and research articles.]]
@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 == Academic publishing ==
-Review articles in [[academic journal]]s analyze or discuss research previously published by others, rather than reporting new [[experiment]]al results.<ref name=John>{{cite web|last=John Siegel|title=Have I Found A Scholarly Article?|url=http://ualr.libguides.com/content.php?pid=183010&sid=1538831|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130128190926/http://ualr.libguides.com/content.php?pid=183010&sid=1538831|url-status=dead|archive-date=2013-01-28}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.lib.sfu.ca/help/publication-types/scholarly-journals#review |title=What is a Scholarly Journal? |publisher=Lib.sfu.ca |date=2013-03-21 |access-date=2013-06-19 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130522191820/http://www.lib.sfu.ca/help/publication-types/scholarly-journals#review |archive-date=2013-05-22 }}</ref>
+Review articles in [[academic journal]]s analyze or discuss research previously published by others, rather than reporting new [[experiment]]al results.<ref name=John>{{cite web|last=John Siegel|title=Have I Found A Scholarly Article?|url=http://ualr.libguides.com/content.php?pid=183010&sid=1538831|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130128190926/http://ualr.libguides.com/content.php?pid=183010&sid=1538831|url-status=dead|archive-date=2013-01-28}}</ref><ref name=":4" />
 An expert's opinion is valuable, but an expert's assessment of the literature can be more valuable. When reading individual articles, readers could miss features that are apparent to an expert clinician-researcher. Readers benefit from the expert's explanation and assessment of the validity and applicability of individual studies.<ref name="Rethlefsen">{{cite journal| title =Engaging Medical Librarians to Improve the Quality of Review Articles| journal =JAMA | date =September 10, 2014| authors =Melissa L. Rethlefsen, M. Hassan Murad, Edward H. Livingston | volume =312| issue =10| pages =999–1000 | doi =10.1001/jama.2014.9263| pmid = 25203078| citeseerx =10.1.1.648.3777 }}</ref>
@@ Line 92: / Line 92: @@
 In terms of the growth of review articles, the rate has been exponential.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Smoller |first=Bruce R. |date=June 2006 |title=Impact factor: certainly a factor, but just whom does it impact? Important lessons from another discipline |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0303-6987.2006.00340.x |journal=Journal of Cutaneous Pathology |language=en |volume=33 |issue=6 |pages=458–461 |doi=10.1111/j.0303-6987.2006.00340.x |issn=0303-6987}}</ref> The number of papers on the topic of ‘pathology’ has increased 2.3 times between the years 1991 to 2006. Within the science discipline, the number of review articles in the [[Science Citation Index Expanded|Science Citation Index]] increased from 14,815 to 45,829 between 1991 and 2005. Following the same trend, the number of dedicated review journals within the Science Citation Index database grew from 163 to 198 between 1999 and 2006. Although, the percentage of review articles in review journals that formed the foundation of review literature decreased by 17% between 1999 and 2005.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rajendra Kale |date=2006 |title=What do Editors of General Medical Journals Want? |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.2349/biij.2.4.e54-8 |journal=Proceedings of the Workshop on Publishing for Biomedical Journal Editors and Reviewers |location=Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia |publisher=Department of Biomedical Imaging, University of Malaya |doi=10.2349/biij.2.4.e54-8}}</ref> This indicates that most review articles are being allocated to original research journals as opposed to strictly review journals. This is also dependent on the quality of the review articles published.
-Separate to the quality of articles, the number of review articles published poses its own challenge to those searching for succinct but comprehensive research analysis. This makes it equally as difficult for experts to navigate through the synthesised review articles as it is to sift through the primary research itself. Additionally, the inclusion of poorly referenced, inadequately researched, and overly biased review articles serve to muddy the water and make it even harder to determine quality writing.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Katz |first=Thomas J. |date=September 2006 |title=Propagation of Errors in Review Articles |url=https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.313.5791.1236a |journal=Science |language=en |volume=313 |issue=5791 |pages=1236–1236 |doi=10.1126/science.313.5791.1236a |issn=0036-8075}}</ref>
+Separate to the quality of articles, the number of review articles published poses its own challenge to those searching for succinct but comprehensive research analysis. This makes it equally as difficult for experts to navigate through the synthesised review articles as it is to sift through the primary research itself. Additionally, the inclusion of poorly referenced, inadequately researched, and overly biased review articles serve to muddy the water and make it even harder to determine quality writing.<ref name=":5" />
 ==Social, behavioural and health science disciplines ==
@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 == Peer review process ==
-The process of review articles being [[Peer review|peer-reviewed]] is critical to their credibility.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rajendra Kale |date=2006 |title=What do Editors of General Medical Journals Want? |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.2349/biij.2.4.e54-8 |journal=Proceedings of the Workshop on Publishing for Biomedical Journal Editors and Reviewers |location=Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia |publisher=Department of Biomedical Imaging, University of Malaya |doi=10.2349/biij.2.4.e54-8}}</ref> The peer review process is a way to ensure the article is as polished and accurate as possible. Most often, those reviewing the article are fellow academics or experts within the field under discussion in the paper. Sending out a peer review allows for gaps in the paper to be acknowledged so that the review can be as well-informed and comprehensive as possible. Peers will often recommend other research articles and studies to be included in the review, which can add strength to the article. Confusion amongst peers also indicates that your paper is not clear or lacking synergy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Tschirhart |first=Lori |title=Research Guides: Publishing in the Sciences: How to Write a Scientific Literature Review |url=https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=283300&p=2915110 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=guides.lib.umich.edu |language=en}}</ref>
+The process of review articles being [[Peer review|peer-reviewed]] is critical to their credibility.<ref name=":3" /> The peer review process is a way to ensure the article is as polished and accurate as possible. Most often, those reviewing the article are fellow academics or experts within the field under discussion in the paper. Sending out a peer review allows for gaps in the paper to be acknowledged so that the review can be as well-informed and comprehensive as possible. Peers will often recommend other research articles and studies to be included in the review, which can add strength to the article. Confusion amongst peers also indicates that your paper is not clear or lacking synergy.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Tschirhart |first=Lori |title=Research Guides: Publishing in the Sciences: How to Write a Scientific Literature Review |url=https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=283300&p=2915110 |access-date=2022-05-10 |website=guides.lib.umich.edu |language=en}}</ref>
 === Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science ===

v t e Academic publishing
Journals	Academic journal Scientific journal Public health
Papers	Paper Abstract Review article Position paper Literature review
Grey literature	Working paper White paper Technical report Annual report Pamphlet Essay Lab notes
Other publication types	Thesis Collection of articles Patent Biological Chemical Book Monograph Chapter Poster session Proceedings
Impact and ranking	Acknowledgment index Altmetrics Article-level metrics Author-level metrics Bibliometrics Citation impact Citation index Journal ranking Eigenfactor h-index Impact factor SCImago Journal Rank Scientometrics
Reform and access	Academic journal publishing reform Open access Citation advantage Serials crisis Sci-Hub #ICanHazPDF
Versioning	Preprint Postprint Version of record Erratum Retraction
Indexes and search engines	Google Scholar AMiner BASE CORE Semantic Scholar Scopus Web of Science Paperity OpenAlex
Related topics	Imprint Scientific writing Peer review Scholarly communication Scientific literature Learned society Open research Open scientific data ORCID Electronic publishing Ingelfinger rule Least publishable unit "Publish or perish"
Lists	Academic journals Scientific journals Open-access journals Academic databases and search engines University presses Copyright policies Preprint policies Style/formatting guides Category:Academic publishing Category:Scientific documents