article review format sample pdf

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Article review writing format, steps, examples and illustration PDF Compiled by Mohammed Yismaw

2021, Article review writing format, steps, examples and illustration PDF Compiled by Mohammed Yismaw

The purpose of this document is to help students and researchers understand how a review of an academic journal is conducted and reported in different fields of study. Review articles in academic journals that analyze or discuss researches previously published by others, rather than reporting new research results or findings. Summaries and critiques are two ways to write a review of a scientific journal article. Both types of writing ask you first to read and understand an article from the primary literature about your topic. The summary involves briefly but accurately stating the key points of the article for a reader who has not read the original article. The critique begins by summarizing the article and then analyzes and evaluates the author’s research. Summaries and critiques help you learn to synthesize information from different sources and are usually limited to two pages maximum.

Related Papers

Harald von Kortzfleisch , Christoph Kahle

Neue Technologien und Innovationen stellen heutzutage wichtige SchlÃ¼sselelemente der Wachstums und Erfolgssicherung von Unternehmen dar. Durch einen in Geschwindigkeit und IntensitÃ¤t immer schneller zunehmenden Wettbewerb nehmen Innovationen eine immer zentralere Rolle im Praxisalltag von Unternehmen ein. Dieser technische Fortschritt treibt auch in der Wissenschaft das Thema des Innovationsmanagements in den letzten Jahrzehnten immer stÃ¤rker voran und wird dort ausgiebig diskutiert. Die Bedeutung von Innovationen wÃ¤chst dabei ebenfalls aus der Sicht der Kunden, welche heutzutage viel differenzierter als frÃ¼her Produkte und Dienste nachfragen und somit Unternehmen vor neue Herausforderungen stellen. Ãberdies stellen Innovationen heute ein entscheidendes Bindeglied zwischen Marktorientierung und erhofften Unternehmenserfolg dar. Seit einigen Jahren lÃ¤sst sich eine Ãffnung der Unternehmensgrenzen fÃ¼r externe Quellen wie Kunden, Zulieferer, UniversitÃ¤ten oder teilweise auch M...

SSRN Electronic Journal

Helmut Krcmar

Dominic Lindner

Alexandra Waluszewski

Research Policy

Nuria Gonzalez Alvarez

Creativity and Innovation Management

Matti Pihlajamaa

Firms tap into user knowledge to learn about the users’ needs. While users have been recognized as a valuable source of knowledge for innovation, few studies have investigated how their knowledge is integrated into innovation processes in the context of complex products and systems (CoPS). The purpose of this study is to reveal the practices of CoPS manufacturers to facilitate user knowledge utilization for innovation. We investigate two case companies, a medical device manufacturer and an aircraft manufacturer, and report on seven managerial practices for utilizing user knowledge. We adopt the absorptive capacity model in structuring our findings and elaborate three of the model's sub-capabilities (recognition of the value of user knowledge, acquisition of user knowledge, and assimilation/transformation of user knowledge) by proposing that each is associated with a distinct managerial goal and related practices: (1) Sensitizing the organization to the innovation potential of user knowledge, (2) identifying and gaining access to suitable user knowledge, and (3) analyzing and interpreting user knowledge and integrating it into product development. Our study contributes to the innovation management literature by analyzing the capabilities required to utilize user knowledge throughout the CoPS innovation process.

Information & Management

Diffusion of digital technologies into the manufacturing industry has created new opportunities for innovation that firms must address to remain competitive. We investigate the role of customer and user knowledge in the digital innovation processes of three global B2B manufacturing companies. We find that the B2B manufacturing industry's characteristics influence how users and customers may be leveraged. Customers making the purchasing decisions are considered for knowledge about short-term changes in market needs, while users working directly with the products provide long-term guidance for digital innovation. We identify practices for acquiring, distributing, and using customer and user knowledge for digital innovation.

Journal of business market management

Patricia Sandmeier

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation JEMI

Given the rising role of users in innovation processes and the increasing amount of research in this field the aim of this paper is to explore the limits of our understanding of the user innovation (UI) concept. In doing so, the study addresses four basic questions: (1) Why do users create and share innovation? (2) Who is the user-innovator? (3) What type of innovation do users create? (4) How do users innovate? The results of a systematic literature review identified the main research streams on user innovation, together with weaknesses of past research and perspectives for future studies.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Gernot Grabher

Journal of Computer‐ …

Petra Schubert , Kathrin Möslein

Mossimo Sesom

Shahab Zare

Arthur Shulman

International Journal of Technology Management

Richard Farr

European Journal of Dental Education

Y.P. CHANDRA

Chandra Yanto

Management Science

John Roberts

Maria Antikainen

Johanna Bragge

intechopen.com

Ivona Vrdoljak Raguz

Service Science

Tuure Tuunanen

Jouni K Juntunen

Benji Decker

Eva Heiskanen

Handbook of Marketing

Jerome Hauser

Service Industries Journal

Christian Kowalkowski

Journal of Engineering Design

Anna Rönnbäck , Ola Isaksson

Journal of Management

Bettina Bastian

International Journal of Innovation Management

Harald von Kortzfleisch

Guido H Baltes

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

Raimo Lovio

Marco Bertoni , Christian Johansson

Dominik Walcher

Managing Service Quality

Tor W. Andreassen

Journal of Product Innovation Management

Gary Schirr

System Sciences, 2004. …

Dominik Walcher , Ralf Reichwald

Edina Vadovics

Jouni Similä

Luis Cancino Muñoz

Shell Artillery

Ralf Reichwald

Journal of the Academy of …

Ian Wilkinson , Subroto Roy

We're Hiring!
Help Center
Find new research papers in:
Health Sciences
Earth Sciences
Cognitive Science
Mathematics
Computer Science
Academia ©2024

PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
EDIT Edit this Article
EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub 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 Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying 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 Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
Browse Articles
Learn Something New
Quizzes Hot
Happiness Hub
This Or That Game
Train Your Brain
Explore More
Support wikiHow
About wikiHow
Log in / Sign up
Education and Communications
Critical Reviews

How to Write an Article Review (With Examples)

Last Updated: August 26, 2024 Fact Checked

Preparing to Write Your Review

Writing the article review, sample article reviews, expert q&a.

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. 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. There are 12 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 3,137,087 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."

Article Review 101

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.

Step 1 Understand what an article review is.

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.

Step 2 Think about the organization of the review article.

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.

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.

Pay careful attention to the meaning of the article. Make sure you fully understand the article. The only way to write a good article review is to understand the article.

With either method, make an outline of the main points made in the article and the supporting research or arguments. It is strictly a restatement of the main points of the article and does not include your opinions.
After putting the article in your own words, decide which parts of the article you want to discuss in your review. You can focus on the theoretical approach, the content, the presentation or interpretation of evidence, or the style. You will always discuss the main issues of the article, but you can sometimes also focus on certain aspects. This comes in handy if you want to focus the review towards the content of a course.
Review the summary outline to eliminate unnecessary items. Erase or cross out the less important arguments or supplemental information. Your revised summary can serve as the basis for the summary you provide at the beginning of your review.

Step 6 Write an outline of your evaluation.

What does the article set out to do?
What is the theoretical framework or assumptions?
Are the central concepts clearly defined?
How adequate is the evidence?
How does the article fit into the literature and field?
Does it advance the knowledge of the subject?
How clear is the author's writing? Don't: include superficial opinions or your personal reaction. Do: pay attention to your biases, so you can overcome them.

For example, in MLA , a citation may look like: Duvall, John N. "The (Super)Marketplace of Images: Television as Unmediated Mediation in DeLillo's White Noise ." Arizona Quarterly 50.3 (1994): 127-53. Print. [9] X Trustworthy Source Purdue Online Writing Lab Trusted resource for writing and citation guidelines Go to source

For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest.

Your introduction should only be 10-25% of your review.
End the introduction with your thesis. Your thesis should address the above issues. For example: Although the author has some good points, his article is biased and contains some misinterpretation of data from others’ analysis of the effectiveness of the condom.

Use direct quotes from the author sparingly.
Review the summary you have written. Read over your summary many times to ensure that your words are an accurate description of the author's article.

Support your critique with evidence from the article or other texts.
The summary portion is very important for your critique. You must make the author's argument clear in the summary section for your evaluation to make sense.
Remember, this is not where you say if you liked the article or not. You are assessing the significance and relevance of the article.
Use a topic sentence and supportive arguments for each opinion. For example, you might address a particular strength in the first sentence of the opinion section, followed by several sentences elaborating on the significance of the point.

This should only be about 10% of your overall essay.
For example: This critical review has evaluated the article "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS" by Anthony Zimmerman. The arguments in the article show the presence of bias, prejudice, argumentative writing without supporting details, and misinformation. These points weaken the author’s arguments and reduce his credibility.

Make sure you have identified and discussed the 3-4 key issues in the article.

↑ https://libguides.cmich.edu/writinghelp/articlereview
↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548566/
↑ Jake Adams. Academic Tutor & Test Prep Specialist. Expert Interview. 24 July 2020.
↑ https://guides.library.queensu.ca/introduction-research/writing/critical
↑ https://www.iup.edu/writingcenter/writing-resources/organization-and-structure/creating-an-outline.html
↑ https://writing.umn.edu/sws/assets/pdf/quicktips/titles.pdf
↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_works_cited_periodicals.html
↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548565/
↑ https://writingcenter.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/593/2014/06/How_to_Summarize_a_Research_Article1.pdf
↑ https://www.uis.edu/learning-hub/writing-resources/handouts/learning-hub/how-to-review-a-journal-article
↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/

About This Article

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. Open your article review by citing the article, then write an introduction which states the article’s thesis. 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

Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Prince Asiedu-Gyan

Apr 22, 2022

Did this article help you?

Sammy James

Sep 12, 2017

Juabin Matey

Aug 30, 2017

Vanita Meghrajani

Jul 21, 2016

Nov 27, 2018

Featured Articles

Watch Articles

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Do Not Sell or Share My Info
Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

Article Review

Ai generator.

Article reviews are an essential part of academic article writing , providing an opportunity to evaluate and analyze published research . A well-written review can help readers understand the simple subject matter and determine the value of the article . In this article, we’ll cover what is an article review, provide step-by-step guidance on how to write one, and answer some common questions.

What is an Article Review?

An article review is a critical assessment of a scholarly article or research paper. It involves analyzing the content, methodology, and findings of the article and providing an evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses. The review typically includes a summary of the article’s main points, an evaluation of its contribution to the subject, and suggestions for improvement.

Examples of Article Review

1. literary analysis of “the great gatsby”.

Title : “The American Dream in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s ‘The Great Gatsby'” Summary : This article delves into the theme of the American Dream in “The Great Gatsby”. It explores how the characters of Jay Gatsby, Daisy Buchanan, and Tom Buchanan each represent different facets of this dream. The review highlights the contrast between Gatsby’s idealistic pursuit of wealth and love, and the moral decay of society depicted in the novel. Evaluation : The article offers a thorough and insightful analysis, drawing on specific passages to support its claims. However, it occasionally lacks depth in exploring secondary characters. Recommendation : Overall, this article is a valuable resource for understanding the complexities of the American Dream in Fitzgerald’s work. It is recommended for students and literary enthusiasts.

2. Scientific Study on Climate Change

Title : “Impact of Global Warming on Arctic Ice Melting Rates” Summary : This article examines recent research on the accelerated melting of Arctic ice due to global warming. The study uses satellite data and climate models to project future ice loss and its implications for global sea levels. Evaluation : The article presents data in a clear and accessible manner, making complex scientific concepts understandable for a general audience. The visual aids, such as graphs and maps, effectively complement the text. Recommendation : This article is highly recommended for anyone interested in climate science and environmental studies. It provides a comprehensive overview of current research and its global significance.

3. Technology Review of the Latest iPhone

Title : “A Comprehensive Review of the iPhone 14 Pro” Summary : The article provides an in-depth review of the iPhone 14 Pro, covering its design, performance, camera capabilities, and new features. It compares the latest model with previous versions and other smartphones on the market. Evaluation : The review is detailed and well-organized, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses of the device. However, it could benefit from more user testimonials to provide a broader perspective. Recommendation : This review is a must-read for potential buyers considering the iPhone 14 Pro. It offers valuable insights into the device’s capabilities and overall performance.

4. Health and Wellness Article on Yoga Benefits

Title : “The Health Benefits of Practicing Yoga Daily” Summary : This article explores the various physical and mental health benefits of incorporating yoga into a daily routine. It discusses how yoga can improve flexibility, reduce stress, and enhance overall well-being. Evaluation : The article is informative and engaging, backed by scientific research and expert opinions. It includes practical tips for beginners and links to additional resources. Recommendation : This article is highly recommended for individuals seeking to improve their health through yoga. It provides a comprehensive guide to the benefits and practice of yoga.

5. Historical Analysis of World War II

Title : “The Role of Codebreakers in World War II” Summary : The article examines the critical role that codebreakers played in the Allied victory during World War II. It focuses on the efforts at Bletchley Park and the breaking of the Enigma code. Evaluation : The article is well-researched and presents a compelling narrative of the contributions of codebreakers. It includes firsthand accounts and historical documents to support its analysis. Recommendation : This article is recommended for history buffs and students. It offers a fascinating insight into a lesser-known aspect of World War II and highlights the importance of intelligence work in warfare.

Examples of Article Review for Students

Review of “the effects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance”.

Title : The Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Cognitive Performance: A Detailed Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s investigation into how lack of sleep affects cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and problem-solving skills. Summary : The article explores various studies showing that sleep deprivation significantly impairs cognitive performance, leading to reduced attention spans, poor memory retention, and slower reaction times. Critique : The article is thorough in its examination of the negative effects of sleep deprivation. However, it could include more information on the long-term consequences and potential mitigation strategies. Some studies cited have small sample sizes, which could limit the findings’ reliability. Conclusion : Overall, the article effectively highlights the critical impact of sleep on cognitive functions, though it would benefit from more comprehensive data and solutions to counteract sleep deprivation.

Review of “Renewable Energy Sources and Their Impact on the Environment”

Title : Renewable Energy Sources and Their Impact on the Environment: An In-Depth Review Introduction : This review analyzes the article discussing the environmental impacts of various renewable energy sources, including solar, wind, and hydroelectric power. Summary : The article covers the benefits of renewable energy in reducing carbon emissions and dependence on fossil fuels. It also examines potential environmental concerns such as habitat disruption and resource consumption. Critique : The article provides a balanced view of renewable energy’s benefits and challenges. However, it lacks detailed case studies and comparative analysis with non-renewable energy sources. The discussion on environmental impacts could be more nuanced. Conclusion : The article is informative and highlights the importance of renewable energy, though it would be stronger with more specific examples and a deeper environmental impact analysis.

Review of “The Influence of Advertising on Consumer Behavior”

Title : The Influence of Advertising on Consumer Behavior: A Comprehensive Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s exploration of how advertising affects consumer purchasing decisions and behavior. Summary : The article examines various advertising techniques and their psychological effects on consumers, including the use of emotional appeal, repetition, and celebrity endorsements. Critique : The article effectively discusses different advertising strategies and their impact on consumers. However, it could include more recent examples and data to reflect current trends. Additionally, it would benefit from a broader range of perspectives, including consumer psychology. Conclusion : The article provides a solid overview of advertising’s influence on consumer behavior, but it needs more up-to-date examples and a wider scope of analysis.

Review of “The Role of Nutrition in Child Development”

Title : The Role of Nutrition in Child Development: An Analytical Review Introduction : This review analyzes the article’s discussion on the critical role of nutrition in children’s physical and cognitive development. Summary : The article highlights the importance of a balanced diet for children’s growth, emphasizing nutrients such as proteins, vitamins, and minerals. It also examines the consequences of malnutrition and dietary deficiencies. Critique : The article is well-researched and presents a comprehensive view of the subject. However, it could benefit from more practical dietary recommendations and a discussion on the challenges faced by different socioeconomic groups. Conclusion : The article effectively underscores the importance of nutrition in child development, though it would be improved by including practical advice and addressing socioeconomic disparities.

Review of “Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Opportunities and Challenges”

Title : Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Opportunities and Challenges: A Detailed Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s exploration of the potential benefits and obstacles of implementing artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare. Summary : The article discusses various AI applications in healthcare, such as diagnostic tools, personalized medicine, and administrative support. It also addresses ethical concerns, data privacy issues, and the need for regulatory frameworks. Critique : The article provides a balanced and insightful analysis of AI in healthcare. However, it could include more case studies and examples of successful AI implementations. The discussion on ethical concerns is somewhat limited and could be expanded. Conclusion : The article offers a thorough overview of AI’s potential in healthcare, but it would benefit from more real-world examples and a deeper exploration of ethical issues.

Examples of Article Review for Research

Review of “the impact of remote work on employee productivity”.

Title : The Impact of Remote Work on Employee Productivity: A Research Review Introduction : This review assesses the research article’s investigation into how remote work influences employee productivity, examining both positive and negative aspects. Summary : The research article explores various factors affecting productivity in remote work settings, such as flexible schedules, work-life balance, and the use of digital communication tools. It presents data from surveys and case studies to support its findings. Critique : The article provides a comprehensive analysis backed by empirical data. However, it could benefit from a more detailed exploration of the long-term impacts of remote work and potential industry-specific variations. Additionally, the research could include a larger, more diverse sample size. Conclusion : The research article effectively highlights the key factors influencing productivity in remote work environments, though it would be strengthened by broader data and long-term impact analysis.

Review of “Climate Change and Agricultural Sustainability”

Title : Climate Change and Agricultural Sustainability: A Review of Current Research Introduction : This review evaluates the research article’s examination of the relationship between climate change and agricultural sustainability, focusing on crop yields and farming practices. Summary : The article discusses the effects of changing weather patterns, increased CO2 levels, and extreme weather events on agricultural productivity. It includes case studies and statistical models to illustrate potential future scenarios. Critique : The research is thorough and well-supported by data. However, it could include more practical recommendations for farmers and policymakers. The article would also benefit from a more detailed discussion of regional differences and adaptation strategies. Conclusion : The research article provides valuable insights into the challenges posed by climate change to agriculture, though it would be improved by offering actionable solutions and considering regional variations.

Review of “The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Modern Healthcare”

Title : The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Modern Healthcare: A Comprehensive Research Review Introduction : This review analyzes the research article’s exploration of AI’s applications in healthcare, including diagnostic tools, patient care, and administrative efficiency. Summary : The article outlines various AI technologies used in healthcare, such as machine learning algorithms for diagnostics, robotic surgeries, and AI-driven patient management systems. It presents data from clinical trials and expert opinions to support its claims. Critique : The research is well-rounded and provides a clear overview of AI’s potential in healthcare. However, it could address more of the ethical considerations and data privacy issues associated with AI implementation. Additionally, more real-world examples of AI applications would enhance the article’s relevance. Conclusion : The research article effectively showcases AI’s transformative potential in healthcare, though it could be strengthened by a deeper exploration of ethical issues and more practical examples.

Review of “The Psychological Effects of Social Media Use on Adolescents”

Title : The Psychological Effects of Social Media Use on Adolescents: A Research-Based Review Introduction : This review evaluates the research article’s examination of how social media affects adolescents’ mental health, focusing on anxiety, depression, and self-esteem. Summary : The article presents data from longitudinal studies and surveys to show the correlation between social media use and various psychological issues. It discusses the impact of online interactions, cyberbullying, and the pressure to conform to social norms. Critique : The research is detailed and presents significant findings. However, it could benefit from a more balanced view that includes positive aspects of social media, such as support networks and educational content. Additionally, the sample sizes in some studies are limited, which may affect the generalizability of the results. Conclusion : The research article provides a comprehensive overview of the negative psychological effects of social media on adolescents, though it would be improved by a more balanced perspective and larger sample sizes.

Review of “The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Programs”

Title : The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Programs: A Research Review Introduction : This review analyzes the research article’s evaluation of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) programs and their impact on mental health and well-being. Summary : The article reviews various studies on MBSR, highlighting its benefits for reducing stress, anxiety, and depression. It includes meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials to provide a robust evidence base. Critique : The research is comprehensive and well-supported by empirical data. However, it could explore more on the long-term benefits and potential limitations of MBSR programs. The article would also benefit from discussing the accessibility and applicability of these programs across different populations. Conclusion : The research article effectively demonstrates the benefits of MBSR programs for mental health, though it could be enhanced by addressing long-term effects and broader applicability.

Journal Article Review Examples

Review of “the impact of social media on academic performance”.

Title : The Impact of Social Media on Academic Performance: A Comprehensive Review Introduction : This review evaluates the journal article’s investigation into the relationship between social media usage and academic performance among students. Summary : The article discusses various studies that explore how social media affects students’ academic outcomes. It highlights both positive effects, such as improved communication and resource sharing, and negative impacts like distraction and reduced study time. Critique : The article is thorough, providing a balanced view supported by empirical data. However, it could benefit from more longitudinal studies to understand long-term effects. Additionally, the article does not address differences in impact based on the type of social media platform used. Conclusion : The journal article effectively highlights the dual impact of social media on academic performance. To strengthen the research, including more long-term studies and platform-specific analyses would be beneficial.

Review of “Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas”

Title : Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: An Analytical Review Introduction : This review analyzes the journal article’s discussion on how urban areas are adapting to climate change, focusing on infrastructure and policy changes. Summary : The article examines various adaptation strategies employed by cities worldwide, such as green infrastructure, zoning laws, and disaster preparedness programs. It presents case studies from different regions to illustrate successful adaptation efforts. Critique : The article is well-researched and provides a comprehensive overview of adaptation strategies. However, it could include more data on the effectiveness of these strategies over time. Additionally, the article would benefit from a discussion on the socio-economic challenges that hinder adaptation in less developed areas. Conclusion : The journal article provides valuable insights into urban climate change adaptation strategies. It would be strengthened by including long-term effectiveness data and addressing socio-economic barriers.

Review of “The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Personalized Medicine”

Title : The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Personalized Medicine: A Detailed Review Introduction : This review evaluates the journal article’s exploration of AI applications in personalized medicine, including diagnostics and treatment plans. Summary : The article discusses how AI technologies, such as machine learning and data analytics, are revolutionizing personalized medicine. It highlights examples where AI has improved diagnostic accuracy and tailored treatment plans to individual patient needs. Critique : The article is insightful and well-supported by clinical data. However, it could delve deeper into the ethical considerations and potential biases in AI algorithms. Additionally, more real-world examples of AI implementation in diverse healthcare settings would enhance the article’s applicability. Conclusion : The journal article effectively demonstrates the transformative potential of AI in personalized medicine. To improve, it should include a more detailed discussion on ethics and practical applications across different healthcare systems.

Review of “The Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Healthcare Workers”

Title : The Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Healthcare Workers: A Research Review Introduction : This review analyzes the journal article’s investigation into the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers. Summary : The article presents data from surveys and interviews with healthcare professionals, highlighting increased levels of stress, anxiety, and burnout due to the pandemic. It discusses the factors contributing to these psychological impacts, such as workload, exposure risk, and lack of support. Critique : The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the psychological challenges faced by healthcare workers during the pandemic. However, it could benefit from more longitudinal studies to understand long-term mental health outcomes. Additionally, the article would be improved by offering more detailed recommendations for institutional support and intervention strategies. Conclusion : The journal article effectively sheds light on the mental health struggles of healthcare workers during COVID-19. To strengthen the research, including long-term studies and detailed support recommendations would be beneficial.

Review of “Sustainable Agriculture Practices and Food Security”

Title : Sustainable Agriculture Practices and Food Security: An In-Depth Review Introduction : This review evaluates the journal article’s discussion on the role of sustainable agriculture practices in enhancing food security. Summary : The article explores various sustainable agriculture techniques, such as crop rotation, organic farming, and agroforestry, and their impact on food security. It presents case studies demonstrating how these practices can increase crop yields and improve resilience to climate change. Critique : The article is well-researched and provides a detailed analysis of sustainable agriculture practices. However, it could include more quantitative data on the economic viability of these practices for small-scale farmers. Additionally, the article would benefit from discussing the policy frameworks needed to support widespread adoption of sustainable agriculture. Conclusion : The journal article effectively highlights the importance of sustainable agriculture for food security. It would be enhanced by including more economic data and policy recommendations to support these practices.

College Article Review Examples

Review of “the effects of sleep deprivation on academic performance”.

Title : The Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Academic Performance: A Detailed Review Introduction : This review assesses the article’s exploration of how sleep deprivation impacts college students’ academic performance, focusing on cognitive functions and overall well-being. Summary : The article examines studies showing that insufficient sleep negatively affects memory, concentration, and problem-solving skills, leading to lower grades and academic achievement. It also discusses the role of stress and lifestyle factors contributing to sleep deprivation. Critique : The article provides a thorough analysis supported by empirical data. However, it could benefit from a broader range of studies, including different demographic groups. Additionally, practical solutions for improving sleep habits among students are not adequately addressed. Conclusion : The article effectively highlights the critical relationship between sleep and academic performance but would be strengthened by more diverse studies and practical recommendations for students.

Review of “The Impact of Technology on Modern Education”

Title : The Impact of Technology on Modern Education: A Comprehensive Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s discussion on the integration of technology in higher education and its effects on teaching and learning processes. Summary : The article explores various technological tools used in education, such as online learning platforms, interactive simulations, and digital resources. It discusses the benefits, including increased accessibility and personalized learning, as well as challenges like digital divide and technological distractions. Critique : The article is well-researched and balanced, highlighting both positive and negative aspects of technology in education. However, it could include more recent data and specific examples of successful technology implementations in colleges. Additionally, the article should address potential long-term impacts on traditional teaching methods. Conclusion : The article provides valuable insights into the role of technology in education, though it would be enhanced by including more up-to-date examples and long-term impact analysis.

Review of “Mental Health Awareness Among College Students”

Title : Mental Health Awareness Among College Students: An Analytical Review Introduction : This review analyzes the article’s exploration of mental health awareness programs in colleges and their effectiveness in addressing student mental health issues. Summary : The article examines various initiatives aimed at improving mental health awareness, such as workshops, counseling services, and peer support groups. It highlights the importance of early intervention and the role of campus resources in supporting student well-being. Critique : The article provides a comprehensive overview of mental health awareness programs and their benefits. However, it could benefit from more quantitative data on program effectiveness and student outcomes. Additionally, the article should discuss the barriers to accessing mental health services, such as stigma and resource limitations. Conclusion : The article effectively underscores the significance of mental health awareness in colleges, but it would be improved by including more data on program effectiveness and addressing access barriers.

Review of “The Role of Extracurricular Activities in Student Development”

Title : The Role of Extracurricular Activities in Student Development: A Detailed Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s discussion on how participation in extracurricular activities impacts college students’ personal and academic development. Summary : The article explores various benefits of extracurricular activities, such as improved social skills, leadership development, and enhanced academic performance. It includes case studies and survey data to support its findings. Critique : The article is well-rounded and provides clear evidence of the positive impacts of extracurricular activities. However, it could include more diverse examples from different types of colleges and regions. Additionally, the article should address potential negative aspects, such as time management challenges and academic pressure. Conclusion : The article effectively highlights the importance of extracurricular activities in student development, though it would benefit from a more diverse range of examples and a balanced discussion of potential drawbacks.

Review of “The Influence of Social Media on College Students’ Mental Health”

Title : The Influence of Social Media on College Students’ Mental Health: A Research Review Introduction : This review analyzes the article’s investigation into how social media usage affects the mental health of college students, focusing on both positive and negative impacts. Summary : The article discusses various studies showing that social media can lead to increased anxiety, depression, and feelings of isolation among students. It also highlights positive aspects, such as enhanced communication, social support, and access to mental health resources. Critique : The article provides a balanced view, supported by empirical data and real-world examples. However, it could benefit from more recent studies and a deeper exploration of how different social media platforms uniquely impact mental health. Additionally, the article should include practical advice for students on managing social media use. Conclusion : The article effectively addresses the complex relationship between social media and mental health among college students, but it would be strengthened by including more recent research and practical recommendations.

Scientific Article Review Examples

Review of “the effects of microplastics on marine life”.

Title : The Effects of Microplastics on Marine Life: A Comprehensive Review Introduction : This review assesses the scientific article’s investigation into the impact of microplastics on marine organisms, focusing on ingestion, toxicity, and ecological consequences. Summary : The article presents various studies showing that microplastics are ingested by a wide range of marine species, leading to physical harm and chemical toxicity. It discusses how microplastics affect growth, reproduction, and survival rates of marine life. Critique : The article is well-researched, providing detailed evidence of the harmful effects of microplastics. However, it could benefit from a broader geographic scope, including more diverse marine environments. Additionally, the article lacks a discussion on potential mitigation strategies to reduce microplastic pollution. Conclusion : The article effectively highlights the detrimental impact of microplastics on marine life, but it would be strengthened by including a wider range of environments and discussing mitigation measures.

Review of “The Role of CRISPR-Cas9 in Gene Editing”

Title : The Role of CRISPR-Cas9 in Gene Editing: A Detailed Review Introduction : This review evaluates the scientific article’s exploration of the CRISPR-Cas9 technology and its applications in gene editing, focusing on its potential and ethical considerations. Summary : The article discusses the mechanism of CRISPR-Cas9 and its use in various fields such as medicine, agriculture, and biotechnology. It highlights successful case studies, including the treatment of genetic disorders and the development of disease-resistant crops. Critique : The article is insightful and provides a comprehensive overview of CRISPR-Cas9. However, it could delve deeper into the ethical issues and potential unintended consequences of gene editing. Additionally, the article would benefit from more recent examples of CRISPR applications. Conclusion : The article effectively demonstrates the potential of CRISPR-Cas9 in gene editing, though it could be enhanced by addressing ethical considerations and providing more up-to-date examples.

Review of “Climate Change and Its Impact on Global Food Security”

Title : Climate Change and Its Impact on Global Food Security: An Analytical Review Introduction : This review analyzes the scientific article’s examination of how climate change affects global food security, focusing on crop yields, food supply, and nutrition. Summary : The article explores various factors influenced by climate change, including temperature changes, altered precipitation patterns, and increased frequency of extreme weather events. It discusses how these factors affect agricultural productivity and food availability. Critique : The article is thorough and supported by extensive data. However, it could include more case studies from different regions to provide a global perspective. Additionally, the article would benefit from discussing adaptation strategies and policy recommendations to mitigate the impact of climate change on food security. Conclusion : The article provides valuable insights into the effects of climate change on food security, but it would be improved by including more regional case studies and discussing mitigation strategies.

Review of “The Advancements in Renewable Energy Technologies”

Title : The Advancements in Renewable Energy Technologies: A Research Review Introduction : This review evaluates the scientific article’s discussion on the latest advancements in renewable energy technologies, including solar, wind, and bioenergy. Summary : The article highlights recent innovations in renewable energy, such as improved solar panel efficiency, advanced wind turbine designs, and sustainable bioenergy production methods. It presents data on the cost-effectiveness and environmental benefits of these technologies. Critique : The article is well-researched and presents a clear overview of advancements in renewable energy. However, it could benefit from a more detailed analysis of the challenges and limitations associated with each technology. Additionally, the article should include projections on the future adoption of these technologies. Conclusion : The article effectively showcases the progress in renewable energy technologies, though it would be enhanced by addressing challenges and providing future adoption projections.

Review of “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Healthcare”

Title : The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Healthcare: A Comprehensive Review Introduction : This review analyzes the scientific article’s exploration of AI’s impact on healthcare, focusing on diagnostic tools, patient care, and administrative efficiency. Summary : The article discusses various AI applications in healthcare, such as machine learning algorithms for disease diagnosis, robotic surgeries, and AI-driven patient management systems. It highlights the potential benefits and challenges of AI integration in healthcare. Critique : The article is insightful and supported by clinical data. However, it could delve deeper into the ethical considerations and data privacy issues associated with AI in healthcare. Additionally, more real-world examples and case studies would enhance the article’s relevance. Conclusion : The article effectively demonstrates AI’s transformative potential in healthcare, but it would be strengthened by addressing ethical concerns and including more practical examples.

Examples of Article Review for Psychology

Review of “the influence of parenting styles on child development”.

Title : The Influence of Parenting Styles on Child Development: A Comprehensive Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s investigation into how different parenting styles affect children’s psychological and emotional development. Summary : The article explores various parenting styles—authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and neglectful—and their impacts on children’s behavior, self-esteem, academic performance, and social skills. It presents data from longitudinal studies and surveys. Critique : The article is thorough and well-supported by empirical data. However, it could benefit from more recent studies and a broader demographic scope. Additionally, practical recommendations for parents based on the findings are not adequately addressed. Conclusion : The article effectively highlights the significant role of parenting styles in child development. It would be strengthened by including more up-to-date research and practical advice for parents.

Review of “The Effects of Social Media on Adolescent Mental Health”

Title : The Effects of Social Media on Adolescent Mental Health: A Detailed Review Introduction : This review analyzes the article’s exploration of the psychological effects of social media use on adolescents, focusing on issues like anxiety, depression, and self-esteem. Summary : The article discusses various studies that show a correlation between social media use and increased rates of mental health issues among adolescents. It examines factors such as cyberbullying, social comparison, and screen time. Critique : The article provides a balanced view supported by empirical data. However, it could include more recent studies and a deeper exploration of positive aspects of social media, such as support networks and educational content. Additionally, practical strategies for managing social media use are not sufficiently addressed. Conclusion : The article effectively discusses the negative impacts of social media on adolescent mental health but would benefit from more recent research and practical recommendations.

Review of “Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Treating Depression”

Title : Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Treating Depression: An Analytical Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s discussion on the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in treating depression, focusing on clinical outcomes and patient experiences. Summary : The article reviews various studies demonstrating CBT’s effectiveness in reducing depressive symptoms and preventing relapse. It discusses CBT’s core components, including cognitive restructuring and behavioral activation. Critique : The article is well-researched and provides a comprehensive overview of CBT’s effectiveness. However, it could benefit from more detailed comparisons with other therapeutic approaches and a discussion on the accessibility and scalability of CBT. Additionally, the article should address potential limitations and criticisms of CBT. Conclusion : The article effectively showcases CBT’s effectiveness in treating depression, though it would be enhanced by including comparisons with other therapies and addressing accessibility issues.

Review of “The Role of Mindfulness Meditation in Stress Reduction”

Title : The Role of Mindfulness Meditation in Stress Reduction: A Research Review Introduction : This review analyzes the article’s examination of mindfulness meditation as a technique for reducing stress and improving mental health. Summary : The article discusses various studies that show how mindfulness meditation can reduce stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms. It explains the underlying mechanisms, such as increased self-awareness and emotional regulation. Critique : The article is insightful and supported by empirical data. However, it could include more longitudinal studies to understand the long-term effects of mindfulness meditation. Additionally, the article should address potential barriers to practicing mindfulness, such as time constraints and individual differences in response to meditation. Conclusion : The article effectively highlights the benefits of mindfulness meditation for stress reduction but would be improved by including long-term studies and discussing barriers to practice.

Review of “The Impact of Sleep on Cognitive Function”

Title : The Impact of Sleep on Cognitive Function: A Comprehensive Review Introduction : This review evaluates the article’s investigation into the relationship between sleep and cognitive function, focusing on memory, attention, and problem-solving skills. Summary : The article presents various studies demonstrating that adequate sleep is crucial for optimal cognitive performance. It discusses how sleep deprivation negatively affects cognitive functions and the underlying biological mechanisms involved. Critique : The article is thorough and well-supported by empirical data. However, it could benefit from a more detailed exploration of the differences in sleep needs across different age groups and a discussion on strategies to improve sleep quality. Additionally, practical recommendations for individuals suffering from sleep disorders are not adequately addressed. Conclusion : The article effectively highlights the critical role of sleep in cognitive function but would be strengthened by including more age-specific research and practical advice for improving sleep quality.

Types of Article Reviews

Article reviews are critical assessments of scholarly articles, often used to evaluate the quality, relevance, and significance of the research. Understanding the different types of article reviews helps in identifying the purpose and approach suitable for various academic and professional needs. Here are the main types of article reviews:

1. Narrative Review

A narrative review provides a comprehensive summary of literature on a specific topic. It focuses on discussing the findings of the research studies and offers a narrative explanation of the trends and themes.

Characteristics:

Summarizes and synthesizes a body of literature.
Identifies gaps in current research.
Provides a background for understanding the topic.
Less structured compared to systematic reviews.

Example: Reviewing literature on the impact of social media on mental health.

2. Systematic Review

A systematic review is a methodical and comprehensive literature review that aims to answer a specific research question. It uses systematic methods to collect secondary data, critically appraise research studies, and synthesize findings.

Uses explicit, systematic methods.
Pre-defined criteria for selecting studies.
Often includes meta-analysis.
Highly structured and replicable.

Example: Evaluating the effectiveness of different interventions for reducing hypertension.

3. Meta-Analysis

A meta-analysis is a statistical technique that combines the results of multiple studies to identify overall trends and determine the effectiveness of interventions.

Integrates quantitative data from multiple studies.
Provides a higher statistical power.
Often included in systematic reviews.
Focuses on effect sizes and statistical significance.

Example: Combining data from various studies on the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy for anxiety.

4. Critical Review

A critical review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of a scholarly article. It involves analyzing the methodology, arguments, evidence, and contributions of the article.

In-depth critique of a single article.
Focuses on the validity and reliability of the research.
Discusses the implications and limitations.
Offers suggestions for improvement.

Example: Critiquing the research design and conclusions of a study on climate change impacts on agriculture.

5. Literature Review

A literature review surveys books, scholarly articles, and other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works.

Broad overview of existing research.
Identifies patterns and trends.
Highlights gaps in current knowledge.
Provides a foundation for new research.

Example: Reviewing literature on renewable energy sources and their environmental impacts.

6. Scoping Review

A scoping review maps the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available. It aims to provide an overview of the range of research activity.

Identifies the scope of literature on a topic.
Useful for emerging areas of research.
Highlights areas for future research.
Less detailed than systematic reviews.

Example: Exploring the range of studies on artificial intelligence applications in healthcare.

7. Integrative Review

An integrative review synthesizes theoretical and empirical literature to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a specific phenomenon or healthcare problem.

Combines qualitative and quantitative research.
Generates new frameworks and perspectives.
Addresses mature topics with substantial research.
Useful for policy and practice implications.

Example: Integrating research on patient-centered care models in nursing.

8. Conceptual Review

A conceptual review focuses on theories and concepts in a particular field. It examines how these concepts are defined, measured, and applied in the literature.

Emphasizes theoretical frameworks.
Analyzes the development of concepts over time.
Identifies theoretical gaps.
Proposes new conceptual models.

Example: Reviewing the evolution of the concept of resilience in psycholog

2. Article Review Guideline

3. Format for Review Article

4. Scientific Article Review

5. Research Experience Article Review

6. Review of Research Articles

Components of Article Review

An article review involves evaluating and summarizing a scholarly article, presenting critical insights, and reflecting on its implications. Understanding the essential components helps in crafting a thorough and insightful review. Here are the key components:

Clearly indicates the focus of the review.
Should include the article’s title and author(s).

Example: “Review of ‘The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health’ by John Smith”

2. Introduction

Provides context for the review.
Introduces the article’s main topic and objectives.
States the purpose of the review.

The article “The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health” by John Smith explores the relationship between social media usage and mental health outcomes. This review aims to critically evaluate the article’s findings and discuss its implications for future research.

3. Summary of the Article

Concisely summarizes the article’s main points.
Includes the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions.

The article investigates both positive and negative effects of social media on mental health. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study finds that while social media can enhance social support and community building, it also contributes to anxiety, depression, and cyberbullying.

4. Critical Analysis

Evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Discusses the validity and reliability of the research.
Analyzes the methodologies used and the evidence provided.
Considers the implications of the findings.

The article provides a balanced view of social media’s impact, effectively synthesizing current research. However, it lacks in-depth analysis of the methodologies used, which could affect the validity of the findings. Future research should include longitudinal studies to better understand causal relationships.

5. Conclusion

Summarizes the key points of the review.
Restates the significance of the article.
Provides final thoughts and suggestions for future research.

In conclusion, Smith’s article offers valuable insights into the complex relationship between social media and mental health. While the study is comprehensive, addressing methodological limitations in future research would enhance our understanding of this important issue.

6. Personal Reflection

Discusses the reviewer’s personal perspective on the article.
Explains how the article’s findings relate to the reviewer’s own experiences or studies.
Offers insights on how the article influenced their understanding of the topic.

As a student, I find the article’s discussion on the negative impacts of social media particularly relevant. It underscores the importance of mindful social media use to maintain mental well-being. This review has deepened my understanding of the subject and will inform my future research.

7. References

Lists all the sources cited in the review.
Follows a specific citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).

Example: Smith, J. (2023). The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health. Journal of Psychological Studies, 45(2), 123-145.

How to write an Article Review?

Writing an article review involves summarizing and critically evaluating a scholarly article. This process helps in understanding the article’s contributions and limitations, and it enhances critical thinking skills. Follow these steps to write an effective article review:

1. Read and Understand the Article

Read the Article Thoroughly : Start with a quick overview to understand the main idea, then read in detail.
Identify Key Points : Note the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions.
Understand the Context : Research the background information and the article’s significance in its field.

2. Plan Your Review

Outline the Structure : Plan the sections of your review: Introduction, Summary, Critical Analysis, Conclusion, Personal Reflection, and References.
Determine the Focus : Decide what aspects of the article you will highlight and critique.

3. Write the Introduction

Provide Context : Introduce the topic of the article and its relevance.
State the Purpose : Explain the purpose of your review.
Mention the Article : Include the title of the article and the author’s name.

The article “The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health” by John Smith explores the relationship between social media usage and mental health outcomes. This review aims to critically evaluate Smith’s findings and discuss their implications for future research.

4. Summarize the Article

Concise Summary : Summarize the main points of the article without inserting personal opinions.
Include Key Elements : Mention the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions.

Smith’s article investigates both positive and negative effects of social media on mental health. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study finds that social media can enhance social support and community building but also contributes to anxiety, depression, and cyberbullying.

5. Critical Analysis

Evaluate Strengths and Weaknesses : Discuss the strengths of the article, such as comprehensive literature review or innovative methodology. Point out weaknesses, such as limited sample size or potential biases.
Analyze Methodology and Evidence : Critically assess the research methods and the evidence provided.
Discuss Implications : Consider the significance of the findings and how they contribute to the field.

The article provides a balanced view of social media’s impact, effectively synthesizing current research. However, it lacks an in-depth analysis of the methodologies used, which could affect the validity of the findings. Future research should include longitudinal studies to better understand causal relationships.

6. Write the Conclusion

Summarize Key Points : Briefly restate the main points of your review.
Restate the Article’s Significance : Emphasize the importance of the article’s contributions.
Provide Final Thoughts : Offer any concluding thoughts and suggestions for future research.

7. Personal Reflection

Discuss Personal Insights : Share how the article relates to your own experiences or studies.
Explain Impact on Understanding : Describe how the article influenced your understanding of the topic.

8. Include References

Cite the Article : Include a full citation of the article you reviewed.
Follow Citation Style : Use the appropriate citation style (e.g., APA, MLA).

Smith, J. (2023). The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health. Journal of Psychological Studies, 45(2), 123-145.

How do I start an article review?

Begin with a brief introduction that provides context, states the purpose of your review, and mentions the article’s title and author.

What should be included in the summary?

Summarize the main points of the article, including the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions without inserting personal opinions.

How do I write a critical analysis?

Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the article, analyze the methodology and evidence, and discuss the significance and implications of the findings.

How long should an article review be?

The length varies, but typically an article review is 2-4 pages, balancing summary, critical analysis, and personal reflection.

How do I conclude an article review?

Summarize the key points of your review, restate the article’s significance, and provide final thoughts and suggestions for future research.

What is the difference between a summary and a critique?

A summary restates the article’s main points objectively, while a critique evaluates the article’s strengths, weaknesses, and overall contribution.

How do I incorporate personal reflection?

Discuss how the article relates to your own experiences or studies and describe how it influenced your understanding of the topic.

Should I include direct quotes from the article?

Use direct quotes sparingly, only when they enhance your analysis. Always explain their relevance to your critique.

How do I properly cite the article in my review?

Follow the appropriate citation style (e.g., APA, MLA) to include a full citation of the article at the end of your review.

Can I express my opinion in an article review?

Yes, but primarily in the critical analysis and personal reflection sections. Ensure your opinions are supported by evidence from the article.

Text prompt

Instructive
Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

The Tech Edvocate

Advertisement
Home Page Five (No Sidebar)
Home Page Four
Home Page Three
Home Page Two
Icons [No Sidebar]
Left Sidbear Page
Lynch Educational Consulting
My Speaking Page
Newsletter Sign Up Confirmation
Newsletter Unsubscription
Page Example
Privacy Policy
Protected Content
Request a Product Review
Shortcodes Examples
Terms and Conditions
The Edvocate
The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
Write For Us
Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
The Edvocate Podcast
Assistive Technology
Child Development Tech
Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech
EdTech Futures
EdTech News
EdTech Policy & Reform
EdTech Startups & Businesses
Higher Education EdTech
Online Learning & eLearning
Parent & Family Tech
Personalized Learning
Product Reviews
Tech Edvocate Awards
School Ratings

Ekster Cardholder Pro: A Smart Wallet for the Modern Gentleman

The worst cat memes you’ve ever seen, how harris roped a dope, ‘the order,’ starring jude law, to open zurich film festival, actor to receive golden eye award, daily horoscope: september 11, 2024, how to watch las vegas aces vs. indiana fever online, how to watch washington mystics vs. chicago sky online for free, how to watch england vs. australia t20 series online for free, price drop: get a 1-year subscription to windscribe vpn for just £37, taylor swift endorses kamala harris in response to fake ai trump endorsement, how to write an article review (with sample reviews) .

An article review is a critical evaluation of a scholarly or scientific piece, which aims to summarize its main ideas, assess its contributions, and provide constructive feedback. A well-written review not only benefits the author of the article under scrutiny but also serves as a valuable resource for fellow researchers and scholars. Follow these steps to create an effective and informative article review:

1. Understand the purpose: Before diving into the article, it is important to understand the intent of writing a review. This helps in focusing your thoughts, directing your analysis, and ensuring your review adds value to the academic community.

2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification.

3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review’s introduction, briefly outline the primary themes and arguments presented by the author(s). Keep it concise but sufficiently informative so that readers can quickly grasp the essence of the article.

4. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses: In subsequent paragraphs, assess the strengths and limitations of the article based on factors such as methodology, quality of evidence presented, coherence of arguments, and alignment with existing literature in the field. Be fair and objective while providing your critique.

5. Discuss any implications: Deliberate on how this particular piece contributes to or challenges existing knowledge in its discipline. You may also discuss potential improvements for future research or explore real-world applications stemming from this study.

6. Provide recommendations: Finally, offer suggestions for both the author(s) and readers regarding how they can further build on this work or apply its findings in practice.

7. Proofread and revise: Once your initial draft is complete, go through it carefully for clarity, accuracy, and coherence. Revise as necessary, ensuring your review is both informative and engaging for readers.

Sample Review:

A Critical Review of “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health”

Introduction:

“The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is a timely article which investigates the relationship between social media usage and psychological well-being. The authors present compelling evidence to support their argument that excessive use of social media can result in decreased self-esteem, increased anxiety, and a negative impact on interpersonal relationships.

Strengths and weaknesses:

One of the strengths of this article lies in its well-structured methodology utilizing a variety of sources, including quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. This approach provides a comprehensive view of the topic, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the effects of social media on mental health. However, it would have been beneficial if the authors included a larger sample size to increase the reliability of their conclusions. Additionally, exploring how different platforms may influence mental health differently could have added depth to the analysis.

Implications:

The findings in this article contribute significantly to ongoing debates surrounding the psychological implications of social media use. It highlights the potential dangers that excessive engagement with online platforms may pose to one’s mental well-being and encourages further research into interventions that could mitigate these risks. The study also offers an opportunity for educators and policy-makers to take note and develop strategies to foster healthier online behavior.

Recommendations:

Future researchers should consider investigating how specific social media platforms impact mental health outcomes, as this could lead to more targeted interventions. For practitioners, implementing educational programs aimed at promoting healthy online habits may be beneficial in mitigating the potential negative consequences associated with excessive social media use.

Conclusion:

Overall, “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is an important and informative piece that raises awareness about a pressing issue in today’s digital age. Given its minor limitations, it provides valuable

3 Ways to Make a Mini Greenhouse ...

3 ways to teach yourself to play ....

Matthew Lynch

How to Fry Chicken Livers: 11 Steps

3 Simple Ways to Dispose of Old Makeup

How to Raise Sea Monkeys: 13 Steps

6 Ways to Dye Bleached Hair

How to Detect Rebar in Concrete

How to Create a Harry Potter Bedroom

How to Order

Article Review

Article Review Writing: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide with Examples

What is an Article Review?

An article review is a critical evaluation and analysis of a piece of writing, typically an academic or journalistic article.

It goes beyond summarizing the content; it involves an in-depth examination of the author's ideas, arguments, and methodologies.

The goal is to provide a well-rounded understanding of the article's strengths, weaknesses, and overall contribution to the field.

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Types of Article Reviews

Article reviews come in various forms, each serving a distinct purpose in the realm of academic or professional discourse. Understanding these types is crucial for tailoring your approach.

Here are some common types of article reviews:

Journal Article Review

A journal article review involves a thorough evaluation of scholarly articles published in academic journals.

It requires summarizing the article's key points, methodology, and findings, emphasizing its contributions to the academic field.

Take a look at the following example to help you understand better.

Example of Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

A research article review focuses on scrutinizing articles with a primary emphasis on research.

This type of review involves evaluating the research design, methodology, results, and their broader implications.

Discussions on the interpretation of results, limitations, and the article's overall contributions are key.

Here is a sample for you to get an idea.

Example of Research Article Review

Science Article Review

A science article review specifically addresses articles within scientific disciplines. It includes summarizing scientific concepts, hypotheses, and experimental methods.

The type of review assesses the reliability of the experimental design, and evaluates the author's interpretation of findings.

Take a look at the following example.

Example of Science Article Review

Critical Review

A critical review involves a balanced critique of a given article. It encompasses providing a comprehensive summary, highlighting key points, and engaging in a critical analysis of strengths and weaknesses.

To get a clearer idea of a critical review, take a look at this example.

Critical Review Example

Article Review Format

When crafting an article review in either APA or MLA format, it's crucial to adhere to the specific guidelines for citing sources.

Below are the bibliographical entries for different types of sources in both APA and MLA styles:

: Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link} : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Publication Year). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp. : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Publication Title. Magazine Title, pp. Xx-xx.

: Last, First Middle Initial. “Publication Title.” Website Title. Website Publisher, Date Month Year Published. Web. Date Month Year Accessed. : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date, Month, Year Published: Page(s). Print. : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year Published): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.

How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps

Writing an effective article review involves a systematic approach. Follow this step-by-step process to ensure a comprehensive and well-structured analysis.

Step 1: Understand the Assignment

Before diving into the review, carefully read and understand the assignment guidelines.

Pay attention to specific requirements, such as word count, formatting style (APA, MLA), and the aspects your instructor wants you to focus on.

Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly

Begin by thoroughly reading the article. Take notes on key points, arguments, and evidence presented by the author.

Understand the author's main thesis and the context in which the article was written.

Step 3: Create a Summary

Summarize the main points of the article. Highlight the author's key arguments and findings.

While writing the summary ensure that you capture the essential elements of the article to provide context for your analysis.

Step 4: Identify the Author's Thesis

In this step, pinpoint the author's main thesis or central argument. Understand the purpose of the article and how the author supports their position.

This will serve as a foundation for your critique.

Step 5: Evaluate the Author's Evidence and Methodology

Examine the evidence provided by the author to support their thesis. Assess the reliability and validity of the methodology used.

Consider the sources, data collection methods, and any potential biases.

Step 6: Analyze the Author's Writing Style

Evaluate the author's writing style and how effectively they communicate their ideas.

Consider the clarity of the language, the organization of the content, and the overall persuasiveness of the article.

Step 7: Consider the Article's Contribution

Reflect on the article's contribution to its field of study. Analyze how it fits into the existing literature, its significance, and any potential implications for future research or applications.

Step 8: Write the Introduction

Craft an introduction that includes the article's title, author, publication date, and a brief overview.

State the purpose of your review and your thesis—the main point you'll be analyzing in your review.

Step 9: Develop the Body of the Review

Organize your review by addressing specific aspects such as the author's thesis, methodology, writing style, and the article's contribution.

Use clear paragraphs to structure your analysis logically.

Step 10: Conclude with a Summary and Evaluation

Summarize your main points and restate your overall assessment of the article.

Offer insights into its strengths and weaknesses, and conclude with any recommendations for improvement or suggestions for further research.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Article Review Outline

Creating a well-organized outline is an essential part of writing a coherent and insightful article review.

This outline given below will guide you through the key sections of your review, ensuring that your analysis is comprehensive and logically structured.

Refer to the following template to understand outlining the article review in detail.

Article Review Format Template

Article Review Examples

Examining article review examples can provide valuable insights into the structure, tone, and depth of analysis expected.

Below are sample article reviews, each illustrating a different approach and focus.

Example of Article Review

Sample of article review assignment pdf

Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

Crafting an effective article review involves a combination of critical analysis, clarity, and structure.

Here are some valuable tips to guide you through the process:

Start with a Clear Introduction

Kick off your article review by introducing the article's main points and mentioning the publication date, which you can find on the re-title page. Outline the topics you'll cover in your review.

Concise Summary with Unanswered Questions

Provide a short summary of the article, emphasizing its main ideas. Highlight any lingering questions, known as "unanswered questions," that the article may have triggered. Use a basic article review template to help structure your thoughts.

Illustrate with Examples

Use examples from the article to illustrate your points. If there are tables or figures in the article, discuss them to make your review more concrete and easily understandable.

Organize Clearly with a Summary Section

Keep your review straightforward and well-organized. Begin with the start of the article, express your thoughts on what you liked or didn't like, and conclude with a summary section. This follows a basic plan for clarity.

Constructive Criticism

When providing criticism, be constructive. If there are elements you don't understand, frame them as "unanswered questions." This approach shows engagement and curiosity.

Smoothly Connect Your Ideas

Ensure your thoughts flow naturally throughout your review. Use simple words and sentences. If you have questions about the article, let them guide your review organically.

Revise and Check for Clarity

Before finishing, go through your review. Correct any mistakes and ensure it sounds clear. Check if you followed your plan, used simple words, and incorporated the keywords effectively. This makes your review better and more accessible for others.

In conclusion , writing an effective article review involves a thoughtful balance of summarizing key points, and addressing unanswered questions.

By following a simple and structured approach, you can create a review that not only analyzes the content but also adds value to the reader's understanding.

Remember to organize your thoughts logically, use clear language, and provide examples from the article to support your points.

Ready to elevate your article reviewing skills? Explore the valuable resources and expert assistance at MyPerfectWords.com.

Our team of experienced writers is here to help you with article reviews and other school tasks.

So why wait? Place your " write my essays online " request today!

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

Page Content

Overview of the review report format, the first read-through, first read considerations, spotting potential major flaws, concluding the first reading, rejection after the first reading, before starting the second read-through, doing the second read-through, the second read-through: section by section guidance, how to structure your report, on presentation and style, criticisms & confidential comments to editors, the recommendation, when recommending rejection, additional resources, step by step guide to reviewing a manuscript.

When you receive an invitation to peer review, you should be sent a copy of the paper's abstract to help you decide whether you wish to do the review. Try to respond to invitations promptly - it will prevent delays. It is also important at this stage to declare any potential Conflict of Interest.

The structure of the review report varies between journals. Some follow an informal structure, while others have a more formal approach.

" Number your comments!!! " (Jonathon Halbesleben, former Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Informal Structure

Many journals don't provide criteria for reviews beyond asking for your 'analysis of merits'. In this case, you may wish to familiarize yourself with examples of other reviews done for the journal, which the editor should be able to provide or, as you gain experience, rely on your own evolving style.

Formal Structure

Other journals require a more formal approach. Sometimes they will ask you to address specific questions in your review via a questionnaire. Or they might want you to rate the manuscript on various attributes using a scorecard. Often you can't see these until you log in to submit your review. So when you agree to the work, it's worth checking for any journal-specific guidelines and requirements. If there are formal guidelines, let them direct the structure of your review.

In Both Cases

Whether specifically required by the reporting format or not, you should expect to compile comments to authors and possibly confidential ones to editors only.

Following the invitation to review, when you'll have received the article abstract, you should already understand the aims, key data and conclusions of the manuscript. If you don't, make a note now that you need to feedback on how to improve those sections.

The first read-through is a skim-read. It will help you form an initial impression of the paper and get a sense of whether your eventual recommendation will be to accept or reject the paper.

Keep a pen and paper handy when skim-reading.

Try to bear in mind the following questions - they'll help you form your overall impression:

What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting?
How original is the topic? What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read?
Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? Do they address the main question posed?
If the author is disagreeing significantly with the current academic consensus, do they have a substantial case? If not, what would be required to make their case credible?
If the paper includes tables or figures, what do they add to the paper? Do they aid understanding or are they superfluous?

While you should read the whole paper, making the right choice of what to read first can save time by flagging major problems early on.

Editors say, " Specific recommendations for remedying flaws are VERY welcome ."

Examples of possibly major flaws include:

Drawing a conclusion that is contradicted by the author's own statistical or qualitative evidence
The use of a discredited method
Ignoring a process that is known to have a strong influence on the area under study

If experimental design features prominently in the paper, first check that the methodology is sound - if not, this is likely to be a major flaw.

You might examine:

The sampling in analytical papers
The sufficient use of control experiments
The precision of process data
The regularity of sampling in time-dependent studies
The validity of questions, the use of a detailed methodology and the data analysis being done systematically (in qualitative research)
That qualitative research extends beyond the author's opinions, with sufficient descriptive elements and appropriate quotes from interviews or focus groups

Major Flaws in Information

If methodology is less of an issue, it's often a good idea to look at the data tables, figures or images first. Especially in science research, it's all about the information gathered. If there are critical flaws in this, it's very likely the manuscript will need to be rejected. Such issues include:

Insufficient data
Unclear data tables
Contradictory data that either are not self-consistent or disagree with the conclusions
Confirmatory data that adds little, if anything, to current understanding - unless strong arguments for such repetition are made

If you find a major problem, note your reasoning and clear supporting evidence (including citations).

After the initial read and using your notes, including those of any major flaws you found, draft the first two paragraphs of your review - the first summarizing the research question addressed and the second the contribution of the work. If the journal has a prescribed reporting format, this draft will still help you compose your thoughts.

The First Paragraph

This should state the main question addressed by the research and summarize the goals, approaches, and conclusions of the paper. It should:

Help the editor properly contextualize the research and add weight to your judgement
Show the author what key messages are conveyed to the reader, so they can be sure they are achieving what they set out to do
Focus on successful aspects of the paper so the author gets a sense of what they've done well

The Second Paragraph

This should provide a conceptual overview of the contribution of the research. So consider:

Is the paper's premise interesting and important?
Are the methods used appropriate?
Do the data support the conclusions?

After drafting these two paragraphs, you should be in a position to decide whether this manuscript is seriously flawed and should be rejected (see the next section). Or whether it is publishable in principle and merits a detailed, careful read through.

Even if you are coming to the opinion that an article has serious flaws, make sure you read the whole paper. This is very important because you may find some really positive aspects that can be communicated to the author. This could help them with future submissions.

A full read-through will also make sure that any initial concerns are indeed correct and fair. After all, you need the context of the whole paper before deciding to reject. If you still intend to recommend rejection, see the section "When recommending rejection."

Once the paper has passed your first read and you've decided the article is publishable in principle, one purpose of the second, detailed read-through is to help prepare the manuscript for publication. You may still decide to recommend rejection following a second reading.

" Offer clear suggestions for how the authors can address the concerns raised. In other words, if you're going to raise a problem, provide a solution ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Preparation

To save time and simplify the review:

Don't rely solely upon inserting comments on the manuscript document - make separate notes
Try to group similar concerns or praise together
If using a review program to note directly onto the manuscript, still try grouping the concerns and praise in separate notes - it helps later
Note line numbers of text upon which your notes are based - this helps you find items again and also aids those reading your review

Now that you have completed your preparations, you're ready to spend an hour or so reading carefully through the manuscript.

As you're reading through the manuscript for a second time, you'll need to keep in mind the argument's construction, the clarity of the language and content.

With regard to the argument’s construction, you should identify:

Any places where the meaning is unclear or ambiguous
Any factual errors
Any invalid arguments

You may also wish to consider:

Does the title properly reflect the subject of the paper?
Does the abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper?
Do the keywords accurately reflect the content?
Is the paper an appropriate length?
Are the key messages short, accurate and clear?

Not every submission is well written. Part of your role is to make sure that the text’s meaning is clear.

Editors say, " If a manuscript has many English language and editing issues, please do not try and fix it. If it is too bad, note that in your review and it should be up to the authors to have the manuscript edited ."

If the article is difficult to understand, you should have rejected it already. However, if the language is poor but you understand the core message, see if you can suggest improvements to fix the problem:

Are there certain aspects that could be communicated better, such as parts of the discussion?
Should the authors consider resubmitting to the same journal after language improvements?
Would you consider looking at the paper again once these issues are dealt with?

On Grammar and Punctuation

Your primary role is judging the research content. Don't spend time polishing grammar or spelling. Editors will make sure that the text is at a high standard before publication. However, if you spot grammatical errors that affect clarity of meaning, then it's important to highlight these. Expect to suggest such amendments - it's rare for a manuscript to pass review with no corrections.

A 2010 study of nursing journals found that 79% of recommendations by reviewers were influenced by grammar and writing style (Shattel, et al., 2010).

1. The Introduction

A well-written introduction:

Sets out the argument
Summarizes recent research related to the topic
Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in current knowledge
Establishes the originality of the research aims by demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area
Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the manuscript

Originality and Topicality

Originality and topicality can only be established in the light of recent authoritative research. For example, it's impossible to argue that there is a conflict in current understanding by referencing articles that are 10 years old.

Authors may make the case that a topic hasn't been investigated in several years and that new research is required. This point is only valid if researchers can point to recent developments in data gathering techniques or to research in indirectly related fields that suggest the topic needs revisiting. Clearly, authors can only do this by referencing recent literature. Obviously, where older research is seminal or where aspects of the methodology rely upon it, then it is perfectly appropriate for authors to cite some older papers.

Editors say, "Is the report providing new information; is it novel or just confirmatory of well-known outcomes ?"

It's common for the introduction to end by stating the research aims. By this point you should already have a good impression of them - if the explicit aims come as a surprise, then the introduction needs improvement.

2. Materials and Methods

Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust - and follow best practice.

Replicable Research

This makes sufficient use of:

Control experiments
Repeated analyses
Repeated experiments

These are used to make sure observed trends are not due to chance and that the same experiment could be repeated by other researchers - and result in the same outcome. Statistical analyses will not be sound if methods are not replicable. Where research is not replicable, the paper should be recommended for rejection.

Repeatable Methods

These give enough detail so that other researchers are able to carry out the same research. For example, equipment used or sampling methods should all be described in detail so that others could follow the same steps. Where methods are not detailed enough, it's usual to ask for the methods section to be revised.

Robust Research

This has enough data points to make sure the data are reliable. If there are insufficient data, it might be appropriate to recommend revision. You should also consider whether there is any in-built bias not nullified by the control experiments.

Best Practice

During these checks you should keep in mind best practice:

Standard guidelines were followed (e.g. the CONSORT Statement for reporting randomized trials)
The health and safety of all participants in the study was not compromised
Ethical standards were maintained

If the research fails to reach relevant best practice standards, it's usual to recommend rejection. What's more, you don't then need to read any further.

3. Results and Discussion

This section should tell a coherent story - What happened? What was discovered or confirmed?

Certain patterns of good reporting need to be followed by the author:

They should start by describing in simple terms what the data show
They should make reference to statistical analyses, such as significance or goodness of fit
Once described, they should evaluate the trends observed and explain the significance of the results to wider understanding. This can only be done by referencing published research
The outcome should be a critical analysis of the data collected

Discussion should always, at some point, gather all the information together into a single whole. Authors should describe and discuss the overall story formed. If there are gaps or inconsistencies in the story, they should address these and suggest ways future research might confirm the findings or take the research forward.

4. Conclusions

This section is usually no more than a few paragraphs and may be presented as part of the results and discussion, or in a separate section. The conclusions should reflect upon the aims - whether they were achieved or not - and, just like the aims, should not be surprising. If the conclusions are not evidence-based, it's appropriate to ask for them to be re-written.

5. Information Gathered: Images, Graphs and Data Tables

If you find yourself looking at a piece of information from which you cannot discern a story, then you should ask for improvements in presentation. This could be an issue with titles, labels, statistical notation or image quality.

Where information is clear, you should check that:

The results seem plausible, in case there is an error in data gathering
The trends you can see support the paper's discussion and conclusions
There are sufficient data. For example, in studies carried out over time are there sufficient data points to support the trends described by the author?

You should also check whether images have been edited or manipulated to emphasize the story they tell. This may be appropriate but only if authors report on how the image has been edited (e.g. by highlighting certain parts of an image). Where you feel that an image has been edited or manipulated without explanation, you should highlight this in a confidential comment to the editor in your report.

6. List of References

You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and balance.

Where a cited article is central to the author's argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use citations differently. Otherwise, it's the editor’s role to exhaustively check the reference section for accuracy and format.

You should consider if the referencing is adequate:

Are important parts of the argument poorly supported?
Are there published studies that show similar or dissimilar trends that should be discussed?
If a manuscript only uses half the citations typical in its field, this may be an indicator that referencing should be improved - but don't be guided solely by quantity
References should be relevant, recent and readily retrievable

Check for a well-balanced list of references that is:

Helpful to the reader
Fair to competing authors
Not over-reliant on self-citation
Gives due recognition to the initial discoveries and related work that led to the work under assessment

You should be able to evaluate whether the article meets the criteria for balanced referencing without looking up every reference.

7. Plagiarism

By now you will have a deep understanding of the paper's content - and you may have some concerns about plagiarism.

Identified Concern

If you find - or already knew of - a very similar paper, this may be because the author overlooked it in their own literature search. Or it may be because it is very recent or published in a journal slightly outside their usual field.

You may feel you can advise the author how to emphasize the novel aspects of their own study, so as to better differentiate it from similar research. If so, you may ask the author to discuss their aims and results, or modify their conclusions, in light of the similar article. Of course, the research similarities may be so great that they render the work unoriginal and you have no choice but to recommend rejection.

"It's very helpful when a reviewer can point out recent similar publications on the same topic by other groups, or that the authors have already published some data elsewhere ." (Editor feedback)

Suspected Concern

If you suspect plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, but cannot recall or locate exactly what is being plagiarized, notify the editor of your suspicion and ask for guidance.

Most editors have access to software that can check for plagiarism.

Editors are not out to police every paper, but when plagiarism is discovered during peer review it can be properly addressed ahead of publication. If plagiarism is discovered only after publication, the consequences are worse for both authors and readers, because a retraction may be necessary.

For detailed guidelines see COPE's Ethical guidelines for reviewers and Wiley's Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics .

8. Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

After the detailed read-through, you will be in a position to advise whether the title, abstract and key words are optimized for search purposes. In order to be effective, good SEO terms will reflect the aims of the research.

A clear title and abstract will improve the paper's search engine rankings and will influence whether the user finds and then decides to navigate to the main article. The title should contain the relevant SEO terms early on. This has a major effect on the impact of a paper, since it helps it appear in search results. A poor abstract can then lose the reader's interest and undo the benefit of an effective title - whilst the paper's abstract may appear in search results, the potential reader may go no further.

So ask yourself, while the abstract may have seemed adequate during earlier checks, does it:

Do justice to the manuscript in this context?
Highlight important findings sufficiently?
Present the most interesting data?

Editors say, " Does the Abstract highlight the important findings of the study ?"

If there is a formal report format, remember to follow it. This will often comprise a range of questions followed by comment sections. Try to answer all the questions. They are there because the editor felt that they are important. If you're following an informal report format you could structure your report in three sections: summary, major issues, minor issues.

Give positive feedback first. Authors are more likely to read your review if you do so. But don't overdo it if you will be recommending rejection
Briefly summarize what the paper is about and what the findings are
Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge
Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory
Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness
State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being overlooked

Major Issues

Are there any major flaws? State what they are and what the severity of their impact is on the paper
Has similar work already been published without the authors acknowledging this?
Are the authors presenting findings that challenge current thinking? Is the evidence they present strong enough to prove their case? Have they cited all the relevant work that would contradict their thinking and addressed it appropriately?
If major revisions are required, try to indicate clearly what they are
Are there any major presentational problems? Are figures & tables, language and manuscript structure all clear enough for you to accurately assess the work?
Are there any ethical issues? If you are unsure it may be better to disclose these in the confidential comments section

Minor Issues

Are there places where meaning is ambiguous? How can this be corrected?
Are the correct references cited? If not, which should be cited instead/also? Are citations excessive, limited, or biased?
Are there any factual, numerical or unit errors? If so, what are they?
Are all tables and figures appropriate, sufficient, and correctly labelled? If not, say which are not

Your review should ultimately help the author improve their article. So be polite, honest and clear. You should also try to be objective and constructive, not subjective and destructive.

You should also:

Write clearly and so you can be understood by people whose first language is not English
Avoid complex or unusual words, especially ones that would even confuse native speakers
Number your points and refer to page and line numbers in the manuscript when making specific comments
If you have been asked to only comment on specific parts or aspects of the manuscript, you should indicate clearly which these are
Treat the author's work the way you would like your own to be treated

Most journals give reviewers the option to provide some confidential comments to editors. Often this is where editors will want reviewers to state their recommendation - see the next section - but otherwise this area is best reserved for communicating malpractice such as suspected plagiarism, fraud, unattributed work, unethical procedures, duplicate publication, bias or other conflicts of interest.

However, this doesn't give reviewers permission to 'backstab' the author. Authors can't see this feedback and are unable to give their side of the story unless the editor asks them to. So in the spirit of fairness, write comments to editors as though authors might read them too.

Reviewers should check the preferences of individual journals as to where they want review decisions to be stated. In particular, bear in mind that some journals will not want the recommendation included in any comments to authors, as this can cause editors difficulty later - see Section 11 for more advice about working with editors.

You will normally be asked to indicate your recommendation (e.g. accept, reject, revise and resubmit, etc.) from a fixed-choice list and then to enter your comments into a separate text box.

Recommending Acceptance

If you're recommending acceptance, give details outlining why, and if there are any areas that could be improved. Don't just give a short, cursory remark such as 'great, accept'. See Improving the Manuscript

Recommending Revision

Where improvements are needed, a recommendation for major or minor revision is typical. You may also choose to state whether you opt in or out of the post-revision review too. If recommending revision, state specific changes you feel need to be made. The author can then reply to each point in turn.

Some journals offer the option to recommend rejection with the possibility of resubmission – this is most relevant where substantial, major revision is necessary.

What can reviewers do to help? " Be clear in their comments to the author (or editor) which points are absolutely critical if the paper is given an opportunity for revisio n." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Recommending Rejection

If recommending rejection or major revision, state this clearly in your review (and see the next section, 'When recommending rejection').

Where manuscripts have serious flaws you should not spend any time polishing the review you've drafted or give detailed advice on presentation.

Editors say, " If a reviewer suggests a rejection, but her/his comments are not detailed or helpful, it does not help the editor in making a decision ."

In your recommendations for the author, you should:

Give constructive feedback describing ways that they could improve the research
Keep the focus on the research and not the author. This is an extremely important part of your job as a reviewer
Avoid making critical confidential comments to the editor while being polite and encouraging to the author - the latter may not understand why their manuscript has been rejected. Also, they won't get feedback on how to improve their research and it could trigger an appeal

Remember to give constructive criticism even if recommending rejection. This helps developing researchers improve their work and explains to the editor why you felt the manuscript should not be published.

" When the comments seem really positive, but the recommendation is rejection…it puts the editor in a tough position of having to reject a paper when the comments make it sound like a great paper ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Visit our Wiley Author Learning and Training Channel for expert advice on peer review.

Watch the video, Ethical considerations of Peer Review

How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples

An article review is an academic assignment that invites you to study a piece of academic research closely. Then, you should present its summary and critically evaluate it using the knowledge you’ve gained in class and during your independent study. If you get such a task at college or university, you shouldn’t confuse it with a response paper, which is a distinct assignment with other purposes (we’ll talk about it in detail below).

In this article, prepared by Custom-Writing experts, you’ll find:

the intricacies of article review writing;
the difference between an article review and similar assignments;
a step-by-step algorithm for review composition;
a couple of samples to guide you throughout the writing process.

So, if you wish to study our article review example and discover helpful writing tips, keep reading.

❓ What Is an Article Review?

✍️ Writing Steps

📑 Article Review Format

🔗 references.

An article review is an academic paper that summarizes and critically evaluates the information presented in your selected article.

This image shows what an article review is.

The first thing you should note when approaching the task of an article review is that not every article is suitable for this assignment. Let’s have a look at the variety of articles to understand what you can choose from.

Popular Vs. Scholarly Articles

In most cases, you’ll be required to review a scholarly, peer-reviewed article – one composed in compliance with rigorous academic standards. Yet, the Web is also full of popular articles that don’t present original scientific value and shouldn’t be selected for a review.

Not sure how to distinguish these two types? Here is a comparative table to help you out.

🗞️ Popular articles are:	🎓 Scholarly articles are:
Written by a professional or non-professional author.	Written by someone with academic credentials.
Meant for the general audience.	Published for the peer academic community.
Featuring reader-friendly, simple language.	Containing professional jargon and vocabulary.
Illustrated by simple and engaging visuals.	Illustrated by tables and graphs.
Structured in a simple way.	Structured according to a scholarly publication’s standards.
Checked by the magazine’s editorial staff only.	Thoroughly reviewed by peer researchers.
Featuring no or scarce references.	Featuring a full list of references.

Article Review vs. Response Paper

Now, let’s consider the difference between an article review and a response paper:

If you’re assigned to critique a scholarly article , you will need to compose an article review .
If your subject of analysis is a popular article , you can respond to it with a well-crafted response paper .

The reason for such distinctions is the quality and structure of these two article types. Peer-reviewed, scholarly articles have clear-cut quality criteria, allowing you to conduct and present a structured assessment of the assigned material. Popular magazines have loose or non-existent quality criteria and don’t offer an opportunity for structured evaluation. So, they are only fit for a subjective response, in which you can summarize your reactions and emotions related to the reading material.

All in all, you can structure your response assignments as outlined in the tips below.

✔️	Both a reaction paper and an article review will start with a content summary.
✔️	For scholarly material, you will present a structured review after the summary.
✔️	For popular magazine content, you will write a response that sums up your emotions, thoughts, and reactions that the material aroused.

✍️ How to Write an Article Review: Step by Step

Here is a tried and tested algorithm for article review writing from our experts. We’ll consider only the critical review variety of this academic assignment. So, let’s get down to the stages you need to cover to get a stellar review.

Read the Article

As with any reviews, reports, and critiques, you must first familiarize yourself with the assigned material. It’s impossible to review something you haven’t read, so set some time for close, careful reading of the article to identify:

The author’s main points and message.
The arguments they use to prove their points.
The methodology they use to approach the subject.

In terms of research type, your article will usually belong to one of three types explained below.

	This type of research is the most common and highly valued in the scholarly community. It uses primary data collected by the author specifically for this article and offers original findings and insights into the discussed research area.
	This research type examines a particular event, phenomenon, or object closely by considering its environment, details, and context. It’s a close-up of the research object that can be achieved via different observation and data collection techniques.
	These articles address new research procedures or methods for testing hypotheses in a specific area of research.

Summarize the Article

Now that you’ve read the text and have a general impression of the content, it’s time to summarize it for your readers. Look into the article’s text closely to determine:

The thesis statement, or general message of the author.
Research question, purpose, and context of research.
Supporting points for the author’s assumptions and claims.
Major findings and supporting evidence.

As you study the article thoroughly, make notes on the margins or write these elements out on a sheet of paper. You can also apply a different technique: read the text section by section and formulate its gist in one phrase or sentence. Once you’re done, you’ll have a summary skeleton in front of you.

Evaluate the Article

The next step of review is content evaluation. Keep in mind that various research types will require a different set of review questions. Here is a complete list of evaluation points you can include.

	cover the article’s purpose comprehensively?
	in data presentation?

Write the Text

After completing the critical review stage, it’s time to compose your article review.

The format of this assignment is standard – you will have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. The introduction should present your article and summarize its content. The body will contain a structured review according to all four dimensions covered in the previous section. The concluding part will typically recap all the main points you’ve identified during your assessment.

It is essential to note that an article review is, first of all, an academic assignment. Therefore, it should follow all rules and conventions of academic composition, such as:

No contractions . Don’t use short forms, such as “don’t,” “can’t,” “I’ll,” etc. in academic writing. You need to spell out all those words.
Formal language and style . Avoid conversational phrasing and words that you would naturally use in blog posts or informal communication. For example, don’t use words like “pretty,” “kind of,” and “like.”
Third-person narrative . Academic reviews should be written from the third-person point of view, avoiding statements like “I think,” “in my opinion,” and so on.
No conversational forms . You shouldn’t turn to your readers directly in the text by addressing them with the pronoun “you.” It’s vital to keep the narrative neutral and impersonal.
Proper abbreviation use . Consult the list of correct abbreviations, like “e.g.” or “i.e.,” for use in your academic writing. If you use informal abbreviations like “FYA” or “f.i.,” your professor will reduce the grade.
Complete sentences . Make sure your sentences contain the subject and the predicate; avoid shortened or sketch-form phrases suitable for a draft only.
No conjunctions at the beginning of a sentence . Remember the FANBOYS rule – don’t start a sentence with words like “and” or “but.” They often seem the right way to build a coherent narrative, but academic writing rules disfavor such usage.
No abbreviations or figures at the beginning of a sentence . Never start a sentence with a number — spell it out if you need to use it anyway. Besides, sentences should never begin with abbreviations like “e.g.”

Finally, a vital rule for an article review is properly formatting the citations. We’ll discuss the correct use of citation styles in the following section.

When composing an article review, keep these points in mind:

Start with a full reference to the reviewed article so the reader can locate it quickly.
Ensure correct formatting of in-text references.
Provide a complete list of used external sources on the last page of the review – your bibliographical entries.

You’ll need to understand the rules of your chosen citation style to meet all these requirements. Below, we’ll discuss the two most common referencing styles – APA and MLA.

Article Review in APA

When you need to compose an article review in the APA format , here is the general bibliographical entry format you should use for journal articles on your reference page:

Author’s last name, First initial. Middle initial. (Year of Publication). Name of the article. Name of the Journal, volume (number), pp. #-#. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy

Horigian, V. E., Schmidt, R. D., & Feaster, D. J. (2021). Loneliness, mental health, and substance use among US young adults during COVID-19. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 53 (1), pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2020.1836435

Your in-text citations should follow the author-date format like this:

If you paraphrase the source and mention the author in the text: According to Horigian et al. (2021), young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic.
If you paraphrase the source and don’t mention the author in the text: Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al., 2021).
If you quote the source: As Horigian et al. (2021) point out, there were “elevated levels of loneliness, depression, anxiety, alcohol use, and drug use among young adults during COVID-19” (p. 6).

Note that your in-text citations should include “et al.,” as in the examples above, if your article has 3 or more authors. If you have one or two authors, your in-text citations would look like this:

One author: “According to Smith (2020), depression is…” or “Depression is … (Smith, 2020).”
Two authors: “According to Smith and Brown (2020), anxiety means…” or “Anxiety means (Smith & Brown, 2020).”

Finally, in case you have to review a book or a website article, here are the general formats for citing these source types on your APA reference list.

	Author’s last name, First initial. Middle initial. (Year). Publisher.
	Author’s last name, First initial. Middle initial. (Year). . Name of Website. URL.

Article Review in MLA

If your assignment requires MLA-format referencing, here’s the general format you should use for citing journal articles on your Works Cited page:

Author’s last name, First name. “Title of an Article.” Title of the Journal , vol. #, no. #, year, pp. #-#.

Horigian, Viviana E., et al. “Loneliness, Mental Health, and Substance Use Among US Young Adults During COVID-19.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs , vol. 53, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1-9.

In-text citations in the MLA format follow the author-page citation format and look like this:

According to Horigian et al., young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (6).
Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al. 6).

Like in APA, the abbreviation “et al.” is only needed in MLA if your article has 3 or more authors.

If you need to cite a book or a website page, here are the general MLA formats for these types of sources.

	Author’s last name, First name. Publisher, Year.
	Author’s last name, First name. “Webpage Title.” , Date, URL. Accessed Day Month Year.

✅ Article Review Template

Here is a handy, universal article review template to help you move on with any review assignment. We’ve tried to make it as generic as possible to guide you in the academic process.

	Frequently, assignment instructions will ask you to include a full citation of your chosen text at the top of the first page of your article review.
	In the introduction, you should summarize the background information and purpose of the research under review. In addition, consider explaining why you chose it for your assignment.
	Next, summarize the article. If you review the original research, consider including the following points: If you review a or a book, include the following in your summary: This section should be no more than a third of your total article review.
	Then, you should critically evaluate the article. Consider answering these questions:
	In the , share your reasoned opinion on the reviewed piece. Was it worth reading? Did you learn any lessons from it? Would you recommend it to someone else, and why?
	In the end, add a separate page with bibliographic citations of your reviewed article and any other sources used in your paper.

📝 Article Review Examples

The theory is good, but practice is even better. Thus, we’ve created three brief examples to show you how to write an article review. You can study the full-text samples by following the links.

📃 Men, Women, & Money

This article review examines a famous piece, “Men, Women & Money – How the Sexes Differ with Their Finances,” published by Amy Livingston in 2020. The author of this article claims that men generally spend more money than women. She makes this conclusion from a close analysis of gender-specific expenditures across five main categories: food, clothing, cars, entertainment, and general spending patterns. Livingston also looks at men’s approach to saving to argue that counter to the common perception of women’s light-hearted attitude to money, men are those who spend more on average.

📃 When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism

This is a review of Jonathan Heidt’s 2016 article titled “When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism,” written as an advocacy of right-wing populism rising in many Western states. The author illustrates the case with the election of Donald Trump as the US President and the rise of right-wing rhetoric in many Western countries. These examples show how nationalist sentiment represents a reaction to global immigration and a failure of globalization.

📃 Sleep Deprivation

This is a review of the American Heart Association’s article titled “The Dangers of Sleep Deprivation.” It discusses how the national organization concerned with the American population’s cardiovascular health links the lack of high-quality sleep to far-reaching health consequences. The organization’s experts reveal how a consistent lack of sleep leads to Alzheimer’s disease development, obesity, type 2 diabetes, etc.

✏️ Article Review FAQ

A high-quality article review should summarize the assigned article’s content and offer data-backed reactions and evaluations of its quality in terms of the article’s purpose, methodology, and data used to argue the main points. It should be detailed, comprehensive, objective, and evidence-based.

The purpose of writing a review is to allow students to reflect on research quality and showcase their critical thinking and evaluation skills. Students should exhibit their mastery of close reading of research publications and their unbiased assessment.

The content of your article review will be the same in any format, with the only difference in the assignment’s formatting before submission. Ensure you have a separate title page made according to APA standards and cite sources using the parenthetical author-date referencing format.

You need to take a closer look at various dimensions of an assigned article to compose a valuable review. Study the author’s object of analysis, the purpose of their research, the chosen method, data, and findings. Evaluate all these dimensions critically to see whether the author has achieved the initial goals. Finally, offer improvement recommendations to add a critique aspect to your paper.

Scientific Article Review: Duke University
Book and Article Reviews: William & Mary, Writing Resources Center
Sample Format for Reviewing a Journal Article: Boonshoft School of Medicine
Research Paper Review – Structure and Format Guidelines: New Jersey Institute of Technology
Article Review: University of Waterloo
Writing Help: The Article Review: Central Michigan University Libraries
Share to Facebook
Share to LinkedIn
Share to email

Compare and Contrast Essay Outline: Template and Example

High school and college students often face challenges when crafting a compare-and-contrast essay. A well-written paper of this kind needs to be structured appropriately to earn you good grades. Knowing how to organize your ideas allows you to present your ideas in a coherent and logical manner This article by...

How to Write a Formal Essay: Format, Rules, & Example

If you’re a student, you’ve heard about a formal essay: a factual, research-based paper written in 3rd person. Most students have to produce dozens of them during their educational career.  Writing a formal essay may not be the easiest task. But fear not: our custom-writing team is here to guide...

How to Write a Narrative Essay Outline: Template & Examples

Narrative essays are unlike anything you wrote throughout your academic career. Instead of writing a formal paper, you need to tell a story. Familiar elements such as evidence and arguments are replaced with exposition and character development. The importance of writing an outline for an essay like this is hard...

How to Write a Precis: Definition, Guide, & Examples

A précis is a brief synopsis of a written piece. It is used to summarize and analyze a text’s main points. If you need to write a précis for a research paper or the AP Lang exam, you’ve come to the right place. In this comprehensive guide by Custom-Writing.org, you’ll...

How to Write a Synthesis Essay: Examples, Topics, & Outline

A synthesis essay requires you to work with multiple sources. You combine the information gathered from them to present a well-rounded argument on a topic. Are you looking for the ultimate guide on synthesis essay writing? You’ve come to the right place! In this guide by our custom writing team,...

How to Write a Catchy Hook: Examples & Techniques

Do you know how to make your essay stand out? One of the easiest ways is to start your introduction with a catchy hook. A hook is a phrase or a sentence that helps to grab the reader’s attention. After reading this article by Custom-Writing.org, you will be able to...

How to Write a Critical Analysis Essay: Examples & Guide

A critical analysis essay is an academic paper that requires a thorough examination of theoretical concepts and ideas. It includes a comparison of facts, differentiation between evidence and argument, and identification of biases. Crafting a good paper can be a daunting experience, but it will be much easier if you...

How to Write a Critical Thinking Essay: Examples & Outline

Critical thinking is the process of evaluating and analyzing information. People who use it in everyday life are open to different opinions. They rely on reason and logic when making conclusions about certain issues. A critical thinking essay shows how your thoughts change as you research your topic. This type...

How to Write a Process Analysis Essay: Examples & Outline

Process analysis is an explanation of how something works or happens. Want to know more? Read the following article prepared by our custom writing specialists and learn about: So, let’s start digging deeper into this topic! ♻️ What Is Process Analysis? A process analysis describes and explains the succession of...

How to Write a Visual Analysis Essay: Examples & Template

A visual analysis essay is an academic paper type that history and art students often deal with. It consists of a detailed description of an image or object. It can also include an interpretation or an argument that is supported by visual evidence. In this article, our custom writing experts...

How to Write a Reflection Paper: Example & Tips

Want to know how to write a reflection paper for college or school? To do that, you need to connect your personal experiences with theoretical knowledge. Usually, students are asked to reflect on a documentary, a text, or their experience. Sometimes one needs to write a paper about a lesson...

How to Write a Character Analysis Essay: Examples & Outline

A character analysis is an examination of the personalities and actions of protagonists and antagonists that make up a story. It discusses their role in the story, evaluates their traits, and looks at their conflicts and experiences. You might need to write this assignment in school or college. Like any...

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
Turk J Urol
v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a review article?

In the medical sciences, the importance of review articles is rising. When clinicians want to update their knowledge and generate guidelines about a topic, they frequently use reviews as a starting point. The value of a review is associated with what has been done, what has been found and how these findings are presented. Before asking ‘how,’ the question of ‘why’ is more important when starting to write a review. The main and fundamental purpose of writing a review is to create a readable synthesis of the best resources available in the literature for an important research question or a current area of research. Although the idea of writing a review is attractive, it is important to spend time identifying the important questions. Good review methods are critical because they provide an unbiased point of view for the reader regarding the current literature. There is a consensus that a review should be written in a systematic fashion, a notion that is usually followed. In a systematic review with a focused question, the research methods must be clearly described. A ‘methodological filter’ is the best method for identifying the best working style for a research question, and this method reduces the workload when surveying the literature. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The ideal way to synthesize studies is to perform a meta-analysis. In conclusion, when writing a review, it is best to clearly focus on fixed ideas, to use a procedural and critical approach to the literature and to express your findings in an attractive way.

The importance of review articles in health sciences is increasing day by day. Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines. [ 1 , 2 ] The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these researches. [ 3 ] As is the case with all other researches, the value of a review article is related to what is achieved, what is found, and the way of communicating this information. A few studies have evaluated the quality of review articles. Murlow evaluated 50 review articles published in 1985, and 1986, and revealed that none of them had complied with clear-cut scientific criteria. [ 4 ] In 1996 an international group that analyzed articles, demonstrated the aspects of review articles, and meta-analyses that had not complied with scientific criteria, and elaborated QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) statement which focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. [ 5 ] Later on this guideline was updated, and named as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). [ 6 ]

Review articles are divided into 2 categories as narrative, and systematic reviews. Narrative reviews are written in an easily readable format, and allow consideration of the subject matter within a large spectrum. However in a systematic review, a very detailed, and comprehensive literature surveying is performed on the selected topic. [ 7 , 8 ] Since it is a result of a more detailed literature surveying with relatively lesser involvement of author’s bias, systematic reviews are considered as gold standard articles. Systematic reviews can be diivded into qualitative, and quantitative reviews. In both of them detailed literature surveying is performed. However in quantitative reviews, study data are collected, and statistically evaluated (ie. meta-analysis). [ 8 ]

Before inquring for the method of preparation of a review article, it is more logical to investigate the motivation behind writing the review article in question. The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. 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.
To synthetize available, but quite different researches

For the specification of important questions to be answered, number of literature references to be consulted should be more or less determined. Discussions should be conducted with colleagues in the same area of interest, and time should be reserved for the solution of the problem(s). Though starting to write the review article promptly seems to be very alluring, the time you spend for the determination of important issues won’t be a waste of time. [ 9 ]

The PRISMA statement [ 6 ] elaborated to write a well-designed review articles contains a 27-item checklist ( Table 1 ). It will be reasonable to fulfill the requirements of these items during preparation of a review article or a meta-analysis. Thus preparation of a comprehensible article with a high-quality scientific content can be feasible.

PRISMA statement: A 27-item checklist

Title
	Title	1 Identify the article as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both
Summary
	Structured summary	2 Write a structured summary including, as applicable, background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, participants, treatments, study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and implications of key findings; and systematic review registration number
Introduction
	Rationale	3 Explain the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known
	Objectives	4 Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS)
Methods
	Protocol and registration	5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (such as a web address), and, if available, provide registration information including the registration number
	Eligibility criteria	6 Specify study characteristics (such as PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (such as years considered, language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale
	Sources of Information	7 Describe all information sources in the survey (such as databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify additional studies) and date last searched
	Survey	8 Present the full electronic search strategy for at least one major database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated
	Study selection	9 State the process for selecting studies (that is, for screening, for determining eligibility, for inclusion in the systematic review, and, if applicable, for inclusion in the meta-analysis)
	Data collection process	10 Describe the method of data extraction from reports (such as piloted forms, independently by two reviewers) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators
	Data items	11 List and define all variables for which data were sought (such as PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and simplifications made
	Risk of bias in individual studies	12 Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias in individual studies (including specification of whether this was done at the study or outcome level, or both), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis
	Summary measures	13 State the principal summary measures (such as risk ratio, difference in means)
	Synthesis of outcomes	14 For each meta-analysis, explain methods of data use, and combination methods of study outcomes, and if done consistency measurements should be indicated (ie P test)
	Risk of bias across studies	15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (such as publication bias, selective reporting within studies).
	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 15).
	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

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. A non-systematic review means use of articles collected for years with the recommendations of your colleagues, while systematic review is based on struggles to search for, and find the best possible researches which will respond to the questions predetermined at the start of the review.

Though a consensus has been reached about the systematic design of the review articles, studies revealed that most of them had not been written in a systematic format. McAlister et al. analyzed review articles in 6 medical journals, and disclosed that in less than one fourth of the review articles, methods of description, evaluation or synthesis of evidence had been provided, one third of them had focused on a clinical topic, and only half of them had provided quantitative data about the extend of the potential benefits. [ 10 ]

Use of proper methodologies in review articles is important in that readers assume an objective attitude towards updated information. We can confront two problems while we are using data from researches in order to answer certain questions. Firstly, we can be prejudiced during selection of research articles or these articles might be biased. To minimize this risk, methodologies used in our reviews should allow us to define, and use researches with minimal degree of bias. The second problem is that, most of the researches have been performed with small sample sizes. In statistical methods in meta-analyses, available researches are combined to increase the statistical power of the study. The problematic aspect of a non-systematic review is that our tendency to give biased responses to the questions, in other words we apt to select the studies with known or favourite results, rather than the best quality investigations among them.

As is the case with many research articles, general format of a systematic review on a single subject includes sections of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion ( Table 2 ).

Structure of a systematic review


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 . To write a good review article the items in Table 3 should be implemented step by step. [ 11 – 13 ]

Steps of a systematic review


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. The most prevalently used format for questions related to the treatment is PICO (P - Patient, Problem or Population; I-Intervention; C-appropriate Comparisons, and O-Outcome measures) procedure. For example In female patients (P) with stress urinary incontinence, comparisons (C) between transobturator, and retropubic midurethral tension-free band surgery (I) as for patients’ satisfaction (O).

Finding Studies

In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.

Ideally, research methods, investigated databases, and key words should be described in the final report. Different databases are used dependent on the topic analyzed. In most of the clinical topics, Medline should be surveyed. However searching through Embase and CINAHL can be also appropriate.

While determining appropriate terms for surveying, PICO elements of the issue to be sought may guide the process. 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.

One method which might alleviate the workload of surveying process is “methodological filter” which aims to find the best investigation method for each research question. 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.

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. To achieve this goal you should know the best possible evidence for each type of question The first component of the quality is its general planning/design of the study. General planning/design of a cohort study, a case series or normal study demonstrates variations.

A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4 . However this hierarchy is only a first step. After you find good quality research articles, you won’t need to read all the rest of other articles which saves you tons of time. [ 14 ]

Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question


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. 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.

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. 2) Research articles in the literature should be approached with a methodological, and critical attitude and 3) finally data should be explained in an attractive way.

COMMENTS

Article review writing format, steps, examples and illustration PDF Compiled by Mohammed Yismaw
- What are the article's shortcomings and limitations? - Are all important aspects and issues of its domain covered? - Examine and comment the logic given in the article Suggested Format of an article review uous information. Illustrative Example for article review Article Reviewed: Matthias, M., Sascha, V., & Jonathan, L. (2014).
PDF Scientific Article Review
Summaries and critiques are two ways to write a review of a scientific journal article. Both types of writing ask you first to read and understand an article from the primary literature about your topic. The summary involves briefly but accurately stating the key points of the article for a reader who has not read the original article.
(PDF) Writing Critical Reviews: A Step-by-Step Guide
the article, taking the main points of each paragraph. The point of the diagram is to. show the relationships between the main points in the article. Ev en better you might. consider doing an ...
PDF A Guide to Peer Reviewing Journal Articles
Peer review is an integral component of publishing the best quality research. Its purpose is to: 1. Aid in the vetting and selection of research for publication, ensuring that the best work is taken forward 2. Provide suggestions for improving articles that go through review, raising the general quality of published research
How to Write an Article Review (With Samples)
Start your review by referring to the title and author of the article, the title of the journal, and the year of publication in the first paragraph. For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest. 4. Write the introduction.
PDF How to Write a Literature Review
theoretical articles • To emphasize the credibility of the writer in their field • To provide a solid background for a research paper's investigation A GOOD LITERATURE REVIEW SHOULD… • Be organized around a thesis statement or research question(s) • Develop your understanding of the literature in a field(s) of study
PDF Format for reviewing an article
Sentence #1- Authors' last names (year) conducted a study about _________________. Read the Abstract;this will give an overview of the study's (article's) purpose. Read the entire article without trying to summarize it. Go back and read the Literature Review orBackgroundsection of the article. Toward the end of the section, the authors ...
(PDF) Writing a review article in 7 steps
Read at least five highquality chapters on a similar topic to make yours better. STEP 2. Gather and read about 50 -100 original articles on a topic within your scientific field. STEP 3. Write down ...
PDF Writing a Critical Review
texts on the same topic. The type of texts you may be asked to review could include books, articles, reports, websites, or films. 1. Purpose 2. Structure 3. Writing style 4. Example 1. Purpose To summarise and evaluate a text, pointing out the strengths and weaknesses. 2. Structure of a critical review • Review of a single text: o Introduction
PDF Article format guide: Review, Technical Review and Roadmap
ticle format guide: Review, Technical Review and Roadmap Please follow the below specifications when writing a Review, article for Nature Reviews.Manuscript fileFile typesPreferred file format is ...
How to write a review paper
January 2019. 3. While you are gathering sources, read at least the abstracts and carry out a scoping exercise that helps you set the boundaries of the topic and the literature you intend to review. Keeping notes as you go of key features of each source will help you later when you lay down the structure of the paper. 4.
Article Review
An article review is a critical assessment of a scholarly article or research paper. It involves analyzing the content, methodology, and findings of the article and providing an evaluation of its strengths and weaknesses. The review typically includes a summary of the article's main points, an evaluation of its contribution to the subject ...
PDF Formatting Guide for Narrative Reviews
was internal and external peer review conducted and used in the finalization of the manuscript . Review Organize the review in logical sections with structured headings. Define your use of language or ratings systems that codify the strength of evidence or strength of recommendations. Document disagreements between authors or minority reports.
PDF Reviewing a Journal Article (Peer Review)
Reviewing a Journal Article (Peer Review) Peer-review is deﬁned as the expert assessment of submitted materials. Because ''the goal of this process is to ensure that the valid article is accepted, the messy article improved, and the invalid article rejected,'' It is done voluntarily and without compensation.
How to Write an Article Review (with Sample Reviews)
2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification. 3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review's introduction, briefly ...
How to Write an Article Review: Types, Format, & Examples
Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly. Begin by thoroughly reading the article. Take notes on key points, arguments, and evidence presented by the author. Understand the author's main thesis and the context in which the article was written.
How-to-Write-a-Journal-Article
This document provides instructions for writing a journal article review in APA style. It outlines the key steps: [1] Find a peer-reviewed journal article related to your research topic, [2] Read the entire article multiple times to fully understand it, [3] Write an APA-style citation for the article, [4] Summarize the relevant literature, methodology, and results without copying directly from ...
Step by Step Guide to Reviewing a Manuscript
Briefly summarize what the paper is about and what the findings are. Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge. Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory. Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness.
PDF University of Washington Psychology Writing Center http://www.psych.uw
The Two Purposes of a Literature Review. wo purposes: (. ) to describe and compare studies in a specific area of research and (2) to evaluatethose studies. Both purposes are vital: a thorough summary and comparison of the curren. essary before you can build a strong evaluative argument ab.
How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples
Both a reaction paper and an article review will start with a content summary. ️. For scholarly material, you will present a structured review after the summary. ️. For popular magazine content, you will write a response that sums up your emotions, thoughts, and reactions that the material aroused.
How to write a good scientific review article
A good review article provides readers with an in-depth understanding of a field and highlights key gaps and challenges to address with future research. Writing a review article also helps to expand the writer's knowledge of their specialist area and to develop their analytical and communication skills, amongst other benefits.
How to write a review article?
The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements: The question (s) to be dealt with.
(PDF) How to write a best Review article
C) Preparing a review article in 18 steps. stage. step. prepare. 1. narrow the topic, define a few research q uestions or hypotheses. 2. search for literature sources, refine topic and research qu ...

Article review writing format, steps, examples and illustration PDF Compiled by Mohammed Yismaw

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

How to Write an Article Review (With Examples)

Preparing to Write Your Review

Article Review 101

You Might Also Like

About This Article

Reader Success Stories

Did this article help you?

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

Article Review

What is an Article Review?

Examples of Article Review

2. Scientific Study on Climate Change

3. Technology Review of the Latest iPhone

4. Health and Wellness Article on Yoga Benefits

5. Historical Analysis of World War II

Examples of Article Review for Students

Review of “Renewable Energy Sources and Their Impact on the Environment”

Review of “The Influence of Advertising on Consumer Behavior”

Review of “The Role of Nutrition in Child Development”

Review of “Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Opportunities and Challenges”

Examples of Article Review for Research

Review of “Climate Change and Agricultural Sustainability”

Review of “The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Modern Healthcare”

Review of “The Psychological Effects of Social Media Use on Adolescents”

Review of “The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Programs”

Journal Article Review Examples

Review of “Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas”

Review of “The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Personalized Medicine”

Review of “The Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Healthcare Workers”

Review of “Sustainable Agriculture Practices and Food Security”

College Article Review Examples

Review of “The Impact of Technology on Modern Education”

Review of “Mental Health Awareness Among College Students”

Review of “The Role of Extracurricular Activities in Student Development”

Review of “The Influence of Social Media on College Students’ Mental Health”

Scientific Article Review Examples

Review of “The Role of CRISPR-Cas9 in Gene Editing”

Review of “Climate Change and Its Impact on Global Food Security”

Review of “The Advancements in Renewable Energy Technologies”

Review of “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Healthcare”

Examples of Article Review for Psychology

Review of “The Effects of Social Media on Adolescent Mental Health”

Review of “Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Treating Depression”

Review of “The Role of Mindfulness Meditation in Stress Reduction”

Review of “The Impact of Sleep on Cognitive Function”

Types of Article Reviews

1. Narrative Review

2. Systematic Review

3. Meta-Analysis

4. Critical Review

5. Literature Review

6. Scoping Review

7. Integrative Review

8. Conceptual Review

More Article Review Examples & Samples in PDF

2. Article Review Guideline

3. Format for Review Article

4. Scientific Article Review

5. Research Experience Article Review

6. Review of Research Articles

Components of Article Review

2. Introduction

3. Summary of the Article

4. Critical Analysis

5. Conclusion

6. Personal Reflection

7. References

How to write an Article Review?

1. Read and Understand the Article

2. Plan Your Review

3. Write the Introduction

4. Summarize the Article

5. Critical Analysis

6. Write the Conclusion

7. Personal Reflection