The main part of how to write a review of an article is writing your critique. You should address whether the article was useful, thorough, and clear in explaining the subject. The critique will form the body paragraphs, so each paragraph should address a single sub-topic. In each paragraph, decide whether or not you agree with the writer backed up with sufficient support. Your intro will identify the article, mention its central themes, and arguments made by the author. Your conclusion will summarize the main points of the article in addition to your critique of them. This means that you should set your review aside for a few days before you start your revisions.

If you have the time you should set it aside for more time before you start editing and proofreading your work. There is a lot you need to know about how to write a article review. We are a group of highly-qualified academic writers that know everything there is about every kind of assignment. You may not feel you are a strong writer or you may not have the time to write the review article on your own. As Putin continues killing civilians, bombing kindergartens, and threatening WWIII, Ukraine fights for the world's peaceful future. What is An Article Review? Some of the most common types are: The Science Article Review The APA Article Review The Law Review Article The Journal Article Review Each of these has a slightly different approach and style from one another and especially from book review writing.

What is a Peer Review Article? How to Review an Article The first thing you need to do before writing your review is fully understanding all that you have to do conduct an unbiased evaluation of the published work. Consider how the article is organized. Read the article carefully more than once. Rewrite the article into your own words. How to Write a Review Article The following 5 step-by-step process is all you need to know about how to start an article review. Create an outline of your review. Write your critique of the article.

Write an introduction and conclusion. Revise, edit, and proofread the review. Smart Tips For A Tip-Top Economics Research Proposal. Previous Post Previous How to Write a Sparkling Value of Life Essay. Next Post Next 40 Catchy Concept Papers Topics To Amuse Your Prof. Let's stand with the heroes. Since in general we are interested in more than one outcome, P, and I can be key elements. In this case we should think about synonyms of P, and I elements, and combine them with a conjunction AND. A good example of this method can be found in PubMed interface of Medline. The Clinical Queries tool offers empirically developed filters for five different inquiries as guidelines for etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or clinical prediction. As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible.

A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4. However this hierarchy is only a first step. Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. In this case a solution should be found. However it is risky to make a decision based on the votes of absolute majority. Indeed, a well-performed large scale study, and a weakly designed one are weighed on the same scale. Therefore, ideally a meta-analysis should be performed to solve apparent differences. Ideally, first of all, one should be focused on the largest, and higher quality study, then other studies should be compared with this basic study. In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1 Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation. Turk J Urol. doi: PMCID: PMC Ömer Gülpınar and Adil Güçal Güçlü. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine İbni Sina Hospital, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey. liamg ulcug. Received Mar 6; Accepted May Abstract In the medical sciences, the importance of review articles is rising. Keywords: How to write, review, writing. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements: The question s to be dealt with. Methods used to find out, and select the best quality researches so as to respond to these questions.

Table 1. PRISMA statement: A item checklist. Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses such as sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression , if done, indicating which were pre-specified. Results Study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted such as study size, PICOS, follow-up period and provide the citation. Risk of bias within studies 19 Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome-level assessment see item 12 Results of individual studies 20 For all outcomes considered benefits and harms , present, for each study, simple summary data for each intervention group and effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot a type of graph used in meta-analyses which demonstrates relat, ve success rates of treatment outcomes of multiple scientific studies analyzing the same topic Syntheses of resxults 21 Present the results of each meta-analyses including confidence intervals and measures of consistency Risk of bias across studies 22 Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies see item Additional analyses 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done such as sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression see item 16 Discussion Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings, including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups such as healthcare providers, users, and policy makers Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at study and outcome level such as risk of bias , and at review level such as incomplete retrieval of identified research, reporting bias Conclusions 26 Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research Funding Funding 27 Indicate sources of funding or other support such as supply of data for the systematic review, and the role of funders for the systematic review.

Open in a separate window. Contents and format Important differences exist between systematic, and non-systematic reviews which especially arise from methodologies used in the description of the literature sources. Table 2. Structure of a systematic review. Section Contents Introduction Presents the problem and certain issues dealt in the review article Methods Describes research, and evaluation process Specifies the number of studies evaluated orselected Results Describes the quality, and outcomes of the selected studies Discussion Summarizes results, limitations, and outcomes of the procedure and research.

Preparation of the review article Steps, and targets of constructing a good review article are listed in Table 3. Steps of a systematic review. Step Processes Formulation of researchable questions Select answerable questions Disclosure of studies Databases, and key words Evaluation of its quality Quality criteria during selection of studies Synthesis Methods interpretation, and synthesis of outcomes. The research question It might be helpful to divide the research question into components. Finding Studies In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Study As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible. Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question. Level Intervention Diagnosis Prognosis Etiology I Systematic review of Level II studies Systematic review of Level II studies Systematic review of Level II studies Systematic review of Level II studies II Randomized controlled study Crross-sectional study in consecutive patients Initial cohort study Prospective cohort study III One of the following: Non-randomized experimental study ie. controlled pre-, and post-test intervention study Comparative studies with concurrent control groups observational study ie.

cohort study, case-control study One of the following: Cross-sectional study in non-consecutive case series; diagnostic case-control study One of the following: Untreated control group patients in a randomized controlled study, integrated cohort study One of the following: Retrospective cohort study, case-control study Note: these are most prevalently used types of etiological studies; for other alternatives, and interventional studies see Level III IV Case series Case series Case series or cohort studies with patients at different stages of their disease states. Formulating a Synthesis Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. Conclusions In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1 Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective.

References 1. Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Swingler GH, Volmink J, Ioannidis JP. Number of published systematic 2 reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. pdf accessed 19 May Mulrow CD. The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Collins JA, Fauser B. Balancing the strengths of systematicand narrative reviews.

Hum Reprod Update. Green BN, Johnson CD, Adams A. Writing narrative literaturereviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. J SportsChiropract Rehabil. Booth WC, Colomb GG, Williams JM. Chicago: The Universty of Chicago Press; The craft of research. McAlister FA, Clark HD, van Walraven C, Straus SE, Lawson FM, Moher D, et al. The medical review article revisited: has the science improved? Glasziou P, Irwig P, Bain C, Colditz G. Systematic reviews in health care: a practical guide. Cambridge University Press;

Last Updated: October 25, References Approved. This article was co-authored by Jake Adams. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. wikiHow marks an article as reader-approved once it receives enough positive feedback. This article has been viewed 2,, times. An article review is both a summary and an evaluation of another writer's article. Teachers often assign article reviews to introduce students to the work of experts in the field. Experts also are often asked to review the work of other professionals.

Understanding the main points and arguments of the article is essential for an accurate summation. Logical evaluation of the article's main theme, supporting arguments, and implications for further research is an important element of a review. Here are a few guidelines for writing an article review. Education specialist Alexander Peterman recommends: "In the case of a review, your objective should be to reflect on the effectiveness of what has already been written, rather than writing to inform your audience about a subject. If you have to write an article review, read through the original article closely, taking notes and highlighting important sections as you read. Next, rewrite the article in your own words, either in a long paragraph or as an outline. Next, summarize the article, followed by your opinion about whether the article was clear, thorough, and useful.

Finish with a paragraph that summarizes the main points of the article and your opinions. To learn more about what to include in your personal critique of the article, keep reading the article! Did this summary help you? Yes No. Log in Social login does not work in incognito and private browsers. Please log in with your username or email to continue. wikiHow Account. No account yet? Create an account. Courses Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article. Quizzes Contribute Train Your Brain Game Improve Your English. Popular Categories. Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies. Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks. Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health. Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues. Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games. Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene.

Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating. All Categories. Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes. Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel. Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth. Support wikiHow Community Dashboard Write an Article Request a New Article More Ideas Edit this Article. Courses New Tech Help Pro New Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Coupons Quizzes Upgrade Sign In. Home Random Browse Articles Courses Quizzes New Train Your Brain New Improve Your English New Support wikiHow About wikiHow Easy Ways to Help Approve Questions Fix Spelling More Things to Try We use cookies to make wikiHow great.

By using our site, you agree to our cookie policy. Cookie Settings. wikiHow is where trusted research and expert knowledge come together. Learn why people trust wikiHow. Categories Education and Communications Writing Critical Reviews How to Write an Article Review. Download Article Explore this Article parts. Sample Article Reviews. Related Articles. Article Summary. Co-authored by Jake Adams Last Updated: October 25, References Approved. Read the article very closely, and then take time to reflect on your evaluation. Consider whether the article effectively achieves what it set out to. Write out a full article review by completing your intro, summary, evaluation, and conclusion.

Don't forget to add a title, too! Proofread your review for mistakes like grammar and usage , while also cutting down on needless information. Part 1. Understand what an article review is. An article review is written for an audience who is knowledgeable in the subject instead of a general audience. Article reviews present more than just an opinion. You will engage with the text to create a response to the scholarly writer's ideas. You will respond to and use ideas, theories, and research from your studies. Your critique of the article will be based on proof and your own thoughtful reasoning. An article review only responds to the author's research. It typically does not provide any new research.

However, if you are correcting misleading or otherwise incorrect points, some new data may be presented. An article review both summarizes and evaluates the article. Think about the organization of the review article. Before you even begin reading the article you will review, you need to understand how your article review will be set up. This will help you understand how to read the article so that you can write an effective review. Your review will be set up in the following parts: Summarize the article. Focus on the important points, claims, and information. Discuss the positive aspects of the article. Think about what the author does well, good points she makes, and insightful observations.

Identify contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies in the text. Determine if there is enough data or research included to support the author's claims. Find any unanswered questions left in the article. Preview the article. Begin by looking at the title, abstract, introduction, headings, opening sentences of each paragraph, and the conclusion. Then read the first few paragraphs, followed by the conclusion. Then read the article in its entirety. When you read the first time, just read for the big picture — that is, look for the overall argument and point the article is making.

Make note of words or issues you don't understand and questions you have. Look up terms or concepts you are unfamiliar with, so you can fully understand the article. Read about concepts in-depth to make sure you understand their full context. Read the article closely. Read the article a second and third time. Use a highlighter or pen to make notes or highlight important sections. Highlight the main points and the supporting facts. Do: supplement the most significant points with notes or cross-references. Put the article into your words. You can do this as a free written paragraph or as an outline. Start by putting the article in your own words. Focus on the argument, research, and claims the article makes. What is the main point driving at? Don't: spend time on editing or phrasing.

If you find yourself troubled with the prewriting and the brainstorming process for this assignment, seek out a sample outline. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The key points in this context refer to the findings and criticisms stated in the body of the work. If the article you're writing requires a lot of knowledge about outside articles, then you will need to read as many as possible, though there is no required minimum. New Pages. Choose your Academic Level.

Categories:

• Essay Online
• Custom Essays
• Essay Website
• Online Essays
• Essay Experts