The do’s and don’ts of writing review articles
If you (or a global pandemic) take the bench away from the scientist, what do they do? They write reviews of course!
As many of us are now far too familiar with, crafting a review article presents a series of unique challenges. Unlike a manuscript, in which the nature of your data inherently shapes the narrative of the article, a review requires synthesizing one largely from scratch. Reviews are often initiated without a well-defined scope going in, which can often leave us feeling overwhelmed, like we’re faced with covering an entire field.
With these challenges in mind, here are a few tips and tricks to make review writing as painless as possible, for the next time you lose your pipette:
- Defining this viewpoint can be extremely helpful in limiting the scope of your literature search, preventing the overwhelming feeling of having to read every paper ever — focus your time and energy on deep-dives into those papers most important to this motivating viewpoint.
- Ask yourself: Who do you want reading your review? What could you cover that would be most helpful to them?
- This will be an iterative process — the focus of your review will likely change significantly over the writing process, as you read more papers and start organizing your thoughts.
- For each review, ask: What are their take-home messages? How can you differentiate your own from each of these?
- As a member of the field, look out for things you wish they had covered: “I wish they had a figure on this, I wish they discussed this, I wish they clarified this…”
- Are there key papers that they missed?
- Are there key papers that have been published since these reviews have been published?
- Cite other reviews to save yourself some writing! If a tangentially related topic is outside of the scope of your review, it’s commonplace to reference other reviews for the sake of brevity, and to recognize their hard work: “X is outside of the scope of this review, but is covered in-depth here [Ref]”).
- For each paper, ask: What was known before this paper, what did this paper show, and what are its limitations?
- It’s important to accept the fact that it is impossible to read, let alone discuss in-depth, hundreds and hundreds of papers.
- Depending on how each paper will fit into your article’s narrative, it may only be necessary to review specific sections or figures. [ I don’t have to read every word of every paper?! ]
- Given the unstructured nature of a non-data-driven article, this is a hugely important step in the process that will make writing infinitely less painful.
- Which key papers are you going to discuss in which sections?
- Outline subsections and transitions under each major section.
- Engage with your PI early and often in the process of crafting your outline, and try to get explicit approval of the finished product before you start writing — this can save you from a lot of painful backtracking later!
- Writing and structuring your review should be iterative as you continue to refine, read more papers, and start to actually get words down on the page
- The most helpful reviews synthesize the findings of multiple papers into a cohesive take-home message.
- Think about how specific findings relate to your overarching motivation for this article
- Think about how different papers relate to each other — do different studies align, or do they contradict each other?
- Keep in mind how people generally skim articles, by skimming the figures — reviews are no different
- Figures should be included in your structural outline
- For example, many people pull schematics from their own reviews to use directly in background slides of future presentations
- While you cannot avoid citing and discussing major, high impact papers from larger journals, consider that these have likely already been discussed in great depth by other reviews given their high visibility. Good research exists in smaller journals, and you can do your part to cast a light on this work.
- You can provide a fresh perspective by looking outside your field for analogous research, provided you can find a creative way to fit it into the scope of your review’s narrative.
Blog post written by Caleb Perez , with input from Tyler Toth, Viraat Goel , and Prerna Bhargava .
Reviews versus Perspectives- It’s important to draw the distinction between reviews and perspectives here. Although we believe that both should review the field in the context of some overarching scientific viewpoint, perspective articles allow the author much more freedom to craft a more opinionated argument and are generally more forward-thinking. If you have that freedom, definitely use it!
Belonging to a group- Of course, the extent to which you can do this may be limited, depending on how familiar you are with the field. First-year graduate students getting into a new field, for example, may not have as great of a grasp on the gaps in the field — you may have to lean on the advice of your PI and colleagues to help guide you here, especially in the early stages of the process before you start your in-depth literature search.
How to read a paper- There are many situations in which a narrower, targeted paper review is warranted. As one example, imagine a section of a review in which you are comparing different technologies for application X. In this context, you may only need to do a detailed review of the methods sections and any figures they have that benchmark their method for your particular application of interest. The rest of the paper is less relevant, so there’s no need to waste your valuable time and energy.
Research Article vs. Review Article
What's the difference.
Research articles and review articles are both types of academic papers that are published in scholarly journals. However, they differ in terms of their purpose and content. A research article presents original research findings and is typically structured with sections such as introduction, methodology, results, and discussion. It aims to contribute new knowledge to a specific field by presenting empirical evidence and drawing conclusions. On the other hand, a review article provides a comprehensive summary and analysis of existing research on a particular topic. It synthesizes and evaluates multiple studies to provide a broader understanding of the subject matter. While research articles focus on generating new knowledge, review articles aim to provide a critical overview of the existing literature.
Further Detail
Introduction.
Research articles and review articles are two common types of scholarly publications that play a crucial role in the dissemination of scientific knowledge. While both serve the purpose of sharing information, they differ in their attributes, methodologies, and objectives. In this article, we will explore the characteristics of research articles and review articles, highlighting their similarities and differences.
Research Articles
Research articles are primary sources of scientific information that present original research findings. They are typically written by researchers or scientists who have conducted experiments, collected data, and analyzed the results. Research articles follow a specific structure, including an abstract, introduction, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion.
In the abstract section, the authors provide a concise summary of the research question, methods, key findings, and implications. The introduction section provides background information, outlines the research problem, and states the objectives of the study. The methodology section describes the research design, sample size, data collection methods, and statistical analyses used.
The results section presents the findings of the study, often using tables, graphs, or figures to illustrate the data. The discussion section interprets the results, compares them to previous research, and discusses their implications. Finally, the conclusion section summarizes the main findings, highlights the limitations of the study, and suggests future research directions.
Research articles are typically peer-reviewed, meaning they undergo a rigorous evaluation process by experts in the field before publication. This ensures the quality and validity of the research. Research articles are essential for advancing scientific knowledge, as they contribute new insights, theories, and empirical evidence to a specific field of study.
Review Articles
Review articles, on the other hand, provide a comprehensive analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. They aim to summarize, evaluate, and critique the body of knowledge in a specific field. Review articles are often written by experts in the field who have extensive knowledge and expertise in the subject matter.
Unlike research articles, review articles do not present original research findings. Instead, they gather and analyze existing research studies, books, and other relevant sources to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic. Review articles follow a similar structure to research articles, including an abstract, introduction, body sections, and conclusion.
In the abstract section, the authors summarize the main objectives, scope, and findings of the review. The introduction section provides background information on the topic, highlights its significance, and outlines the objectives of the review. The body sections of a review article are divided into subtopics or themes, where the authors discuss and analyze the existing research in a systematic manner.
Review articles often include tables, figures, or diagrams to summarize and present the key findings from the reviewed studies. The conclusion section of a review article summarizes the main findings, identifies gaps in the existing research, and suggests future research directions.
Review articles are also typically peer-reviewed, ensuring the credibility and accuracy of the information presented. They serve as valuable resources for researchers, students, and professionals who want to gain a comprehensive understanding of a specific topic without having to read numerous individual research articles.
Similarities
While research articles and review articles have distinct characteristics, they also share some similarities. Both types of articles are published in scholarly journals and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their respective fields. They both follow a structured format, including abstracts, introductions, and conclusions.
Additionally, both research articles and review articles undergo a peer-review process to ensure the quality and validity of the information presented. This process involves experts in the field critically evaluating the articles for their methodology, analysis, and contribution to the field.
Both research articles and review articles also require a thorough literature review to establish the context and background of the study or review. This ensures that the authors are building upon existing knowledge and addressing gaps in the field.
Differences
While there are similarities between research articles and review articles, there are also significant differences in their attributes and objectives. The most notable difference is that research articles present original research findings, while review articles analyze and synthesize existing research.
Research articles focus on addressing a specific research question or hypothesis through the collection and analysis of data. They aim to contribute new knowledge and insights to the field. In contrast, review articles aim to provide a comprehensive overview and analysis of existing research on a specific topic. They aim to summarize the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and suggest future research directions.
Another difference is the structure of the articles. Research articles follow a specific format, including sections such as methodology, results, and discussion. Review articles also have a structured format but may vary in the number and organization of their sections, depending on the topic and the preferences of the authors.
Furthermore, the audience for research articles and review articles may differ. Research articles are often targeted towards researchers, scientists, and professionals in a specific field who are interested in the details of a particular study. Review articles, on the other hand, are valuable resources for researchers, students, and professionals who want to gain a broad understanding of a topic or need a comprehensive literature review on a specific subject.
Lastly, the time required to produce research articles and review articles may differ. Research articles often require a significant amount of time to design and conduct experiments, collect and analyze data, and write up the findings. Review articles, while still time-consuming, primarily involve extensive literature review, analysis, and synthesis of existing research.
In conclusion, research articles and review articles are two distinct types of scholarly publications that serve different purposes in the scientific community. Research articles present original research findings, contributing new knowledge to a specific field, while review articles analyze and synthesize existing research on a particular topic. Both types of articles undergo a peer-review process and follow a structured format, but their content, objectives, and target audience differ. Understanding the attributes and differences between research articles and review articles is essential for researchers, students, and professionals to effectively navigate and contribute to the scientific literature.
Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.
IMAGES
VIDEO