research articles and review articles

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.

• College Essay
• Argumentative Essay
• Expository Essay
• Narrative Essay
• Descriptive Essay
• Scholarship Essay
• Admission Essay
• Reflective Essay
• Nursing Essay
• Economics Essay

Assignments

• Term Papers
• Research Papers
• Case Studies
• Dissertation
• Presentation
• Write My Assignment
• Editing Help
• Cheap Essay Writing
• How to Order

Article Review

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

People also read

Learn How to Write an Editorial on Any Topic

Best Tips on How to Avoid Plagiarism

How to Write a Movie Review - Guide & Examples

A Complete Guide on How to Write a Summary for Students

Write Opinion Essay Like a Pro: A Detailed Guide

Evaluation Essay - Definition, Examples, and Writing Tips

How to Write a Thematic Statement with Examples

How to Write a Bio - Quick Tips, Structure & Examples

How to Write a Synopsis – A Simple Format & Guide

How to Write a Comparative Essay – A Complete Guide

Visual Analysis Essay - A Writing Guide with Format & Sample

List of Common Social Issues Around the World

Writing Character Analysis - Outline, Steps, and Examples

11 Common Types of Plagiarism Explained Through Examples

A Detailed Guide on How to Write a Poem Step by Step

Detailed Guide on Appendix Writing: With Tips and Examples

Struggling to write a review that people actually want to read? Feeling lost in the details and wondering how to make your analysis stand out?

You're not alone!

Many writers find it tough to navigate the world of article reviews, not sure where to start or how to make their reviews really grab attention.

No worries! 

In this blog, we're going to guide you through the process of writing an article review that stands out. We'll also share tips, and examples to make this process easier for you.

Let’s get started.

• 1. What is an Article Review?
• 2. Types of Article Reviews
• 3. Article Review Format
• 4. How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps
• 5. Article Review Outline
• 6. Article Review Examples
• 7. Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

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 - MyPerfectWords.com

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:

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

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. 

Need someone to do my essay now ? Get help from our experts today!

They can help you with article reviews and any other assignment that you might have. 

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.

Struggling With Your Paper?

Get a custom paper written at

With a FREE Turnitin report, and a 100% money-back guarantee

LIMITED TIME ONLY!

Keep reading

OFFER EXPIRES SOON!

What Is The Difference Between A Scholarly Research Article And A Review Article?

If you are new in the academic world, you may find the types of academic articles dizziying. The more common ones include research articles, and also review articles. How are they similar and different from each other? Distinguishing between research and review articles is crucial. 

In this post, let’s explore what research and review articles are, and how are they different.

Research Article vs. Review Article

What is a research article .

A research article serves as the cornerstone of the academic and scientific community, standing as a detailed report on original findings.

Unlike review articles which synthesise existing literature to provide an overview, research articles present primary research with fresh data, exploring uncharted territories within a specific field.

The devil is in the details when it comes to these scholarly works. Original studies not only pose a research question but delve into methodologies that range from complex experimental designs to detailed observations.

Scholarly articles are often peer-reviewed, meaning that other experts in the field scrutinise the work before publication to ensure its validity and contribution to the field.

The empirical nature of research articles means that the raw data and analysis methods are laid bare for replication—a fundamental tenet of scientific inquiry. These papers typically include:

• Introduction: Introduces the problem
• Methodology: T he means by which the study was conducted
• Results: F indings from the study
• Discussion: Connects the findings to the bigger picture, highlighting implications and potential for future research.

While some journals accept such articles readily, the journey of a paper from research question to published research is fraught with meticulous data collection and rigorous peer evaluation.

For the keen observer, it’s the systematic reviews and meta-analyses that truly offer a glimpse into the current state of understanding, weaving through the tapestry of existing knowledge to pinpoint gaps and suggest paths forward.

It’s this level of detail—often hidden in plain sight in methods and results—that serves as a rich vein of information for those looking to conduct systematic reviews or embark on a similar empirical journey.

Whether it’s a clinical case study or a large-scale trial, the research article is an essential treasure in the scholarly literature, serving as a building block for academic writing and future exploration.

What Is A Review Article?

A review article stands out in the scholarly world as a synthesis of existing research, providing a critical and comprehensive analysis of a particular topic.

Unlike original research articles that report new empirical findings, review articles serve as a bridge connecting a myriad of studies, offering an overview that discerns patterns, strengths, and gaps within published work.

Peer-reviewed and systematically organised, these articles are essential for scholars who wish to familiarise themselves with the current state of knowledge on a given subject without having to delve into each individual research paper.

Insiders know that the crafting of a review article is an art in itself. Authors meticulously collect and analyse data from various sources, often employing methods like meta-analysis or systematic review searches to compare and combine findings.

They don’t just summarise existing literature; they synthesise it, providing new insights or revealing unexplored areas that could benefit from future research. It’s a rigorous process, often involving the intricate task of:

• Comparing clinical trials,
• Conducting extensive literature reviews, or even
• Generating new frameworks for understanding complex academic concepts.

The value of a well-conducted review is immense. Journals publishing these articles often see them as keystones, providing a foundation upon which other researchers can build.

Such reviews can point to the need for new primary research, challenge existing paradigms, or even sometimes shift the direction of scholarly inquiry.

For the discerning academic, a review article is not just a summary—it’s a roadmap for what comes next in the quest for knowledge.

How Are Review And Research Articles Different?

In the scholarly cosmos, the distinction between a research article and a review article is fundamental, yet it’s a source of perplexity for budding academics. Diving into the anatomy of these articles reveals their distinct roles in academia.

Original Research vs Synthesised Knowledge

A research article is an original study, presenting novel findings. It follows a stringent structure: an abstract to summarize the study, an introduction to set the stage, followed by methods, results, and a discussion that connects the findings to broader implications.

A review article instead synthesises the information from one or many of these original studies, into an article to allow easier reading. Some also offer additional insights for the readers. 

Anatomy & Structure

An original research article is usually brimming with original data, charts, and perhaps phrases like “we investigated” or “the study found,” signifying fresh empirical insights. At the most basic, a research article usually contains sections such as:

• Introduction
• Methodology
• Future research ideas

A review article usually begins with an abstract summarising the scope and findings of the review. The main body is divided into sections that often include:

• An introduction to the topic
• A discussion segment that synthesises and analyses the compiled research
• Subtopics that further categorise the research by themes or methodologies. 

Finally, it concludes with a summary or conclusion that reflects on the current state of research, identifies gaps, and may suggest directions for future studies, accompanied by a thorough list of references.

A research article is written to share new findings and original data on a particular research. This means the information are fresh, and new to the scientific community.

An example title of a research article may be “Investigating Necrotic Enteritis in 15 Californian Broiler Chicken Farms.”

A review article is more akin to an academic digest, offering a synthesis of existing research on a topic. It typically lacks the methodology and results sections found in research papers.

The main goal is to give a panoramic view of the existing literature, gaps, and sometimes, a meta-analysis combining findings from various studies to distill a more substantial conclusion.

An example of a review article about Necrotic Enteritis may be something like this: “Necrotic Enteritis in Broiler Chickens – What We Know So Far.” 

Impact and Use in Academia

Research articles are the primary sources, documenting original work from scientists, as they conduct researches in their fields.

Original research articles are crucial in academia as they contribute new knowledge, support evidence-based advancements, and form the foundation for subsequent scholarly inquiry.

Research articles: 

• Provide detailed methodology and results for peer scrutiny
• Foster academic dialogue,
• Often the preferred source for cutting-edge information in a given field, and
• Directly impacting teaching, policy-making, and further research.

Review articles are summaries that distill wisdom from multiple sources to shed light on the current state of knowledge, often guiding future research.

They are usually seen as secondary sources, containing insights that research articles might not individually convey.

Journals prize them for their ability to provide a systematic overview, and while they may not require the substantial funding necessary for conducting original research, their scholarly impact is substantial.

Wrapping Up

In the academic landscape, research articles and review articles form the backbone of knowledge dissemination and scholarly progress.

Research articles introduce novel insights, pushing the boundaries of understanding, while review articles offer a synthesis of existing findings, guiding future studies.

Both are essential: one for its fresh empirical contributions, the other for its comprehensive overviews and analytical prowess.

Together, they underpin the scientific method, spur academic debate, and serve as the keystones of educational advancement and informed decision-making in the quest for enlightenment and innovation.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

• Study resources
• Calendar - Graduate
• Calendar - Undergraduate
• Class schedules
• Class cancellations
• Course registration
• Important academic dates
• More academic resources
• Campus services
• IT services
• Job opportunities
• Safety & prevention
• Mental health support
• Student Service Centre (Birks)
• All campus services
• Calendar of events
• Latest news
• Media Relations
• Faculties, Schools & Colleges
• Arts and Science
• Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science
• John Molson School of Business
• School of Graduate Studies
• All Schools, Colleges & Departments.
• Directories
• My Library Account (Sofia) View checkouts, fees, place requests and more
• Interlibrary Loans Request books from external libraries
• Zotero Manage your citations and create bibliographies
• E-journals via BrowZine Browse & read journals through a friendly interface
• Article/Chapter Scan & Deliver Request a PDF of an article/chapter we have in our physical collection
• Course Reserves Online course readings
• Spectrum Deposit a thesis or article
• WebPrint Upload documents to print with DPrint
• Sofia Discovery tool
• Databases by subject
• Course Reserves
• E-journals via Browzine
• E-journals via Sofia
• Article/chapter scan
• Intercampus delivery of bound periodicals/microforms
• Interlibrary loans
• Spectrum Research Repository
• Special Collections & Archives
• Additional resources & services
• Subject & course guides
• Borrowing & renewing
• Open Educational Resources Guide
• Instructional Services
• General guides for users
• Ask a librarian
• Research Skills Tutorial
• Quick Things for Digital Knowledge
• Critical Toolkit for Navigating Information
• Bibliometrics & research impact guide
• Concordia University Press
• Copyright guide
• Copyright guide for thesis preparation
• Digital scholarship
• Digital preservation
• Open at Concordia
• ORCiD at Concordia
• Research data management guide
• Scholarship of Teaching & Learning
• Systematic Reviews
• Borrow (laptops, tablets, equipment)
• Connect (netname, Wi-Fi, guest accounts)
• Desktop computers, software & availability maps
• Group study, presentation practice & classrooms
• Printers, copiers & scanners
• Technology Sandbox
• Visualization Studio
• Webster Library
• Vanier Library
• Grey Nuns Reading Room
• Study spaces
• Floor plans
• Book a group study room/scanner
• Room booking for academic events
• Exhibitions
• Librarians & staff
• Work with us
• Memberships & collaborations
• Indigenous Student Librarian program
• Wikipedian in residence
• Researcher in residence
• Feedback & improvement
• Annual reports & fast facts
• Strategic Plan 2016/21
• Library Services Fund
• Giving to the Library
• Policies & Code of Conduct
• My Library Account (Sofia)
• Interlibrary Loans
• E-journals via BrowZine
• Article/Chapter Scan & Deliver

Review vs. Research Articles

How can you tell if you are looking at a research paper, review paper or a systematic review  examples and article characteristics are provided below to help you figure it out., research papers.

A research article describes a study that was performed by the article’s author(s). It explains the methodology of the study, such as how data was collected and analyzed, and clarifies what the results mean. Each step of the study is reported in detail so that other researchers can repeat the experiment.

To determine if a paper is a research article, examine its wording. Research articles describe actions taken by the researcher(s) during the experimental process. Look for statements like “we tested,” “I measured,” or “we investigated.” Research articles also describe the outcomes of studies. Check for phrases like “the study found” or “the results indicate.” Next, look closely at the formatting of the article. Research papers are divided into sections that occur in a particular order: abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and references.

Let's take a closer look at this research paper by Bacon et al. published in the International Journal of Hypertension :

Review Papers

Review articles do not describe original research conducted by the author(s). Instead, they give an overview of a specific subject by examining previously published studies on the topic. The author searches for and selects studies on the subject and then tries to make sense of their findings. In particular, review articles look at whether the outcomes of the chosen studies are similar, and if they are not, attempt to explain the conflicting results. By interpreting the findings of previous studies, review articles are able to present the current knowledge and understanding of a specific topic.

Since review articles summarize the research on a particular topic, students should read them for background information before consulting detailed, technical research articles. Furthermore, review articles are a useful starting point for a research project because their reference lists can be used to find additional articles on the subject.

Let's take a closer look at this review paper by Bacon et al. published in Sports Medicine :

Systematic Review Papers

A systematic review is a type of review article that tries to limit the occurrence of bias. Traditional, non-systematic reviews can be biased because they do not include all of the available papers on the review’s topic; only certain studies are discussed by the author. No formal process is used to decide which articles to include in the review. Consequently, unpublished articles, older papers, works in foreign languages, manuscripts published in small journals, and studies that conflict with the author’s beliefs can be overlooked or excluded. Since traditional reviews do not have to explain the techniques used to select the studies, it can be difficult to determine if the author’s bias affected the review’s findings.

Systematic reviews were developed to address the problem of bias. Unlike traditional reviews, which cover a broad topic, systematic reviews focus on a single question, such as if a particular intervention successfully treats a medical condition. Systematic reviews then track down all of the available studies that address the question, choose some to include in the review, and critique them using predetermined criteria. The studies are found, selected, and evaluated using a formal, scientific methodology in order to minimize the effect of the author’s bias. The methodology is clearly explained in the systematic review so that readers can form opinions about the quality of the review.

Let's take a closer look this systematic review paper by Vigano et al. published in Lancet Oncology :

Finding Review and Research Papers in PubMed

Many databases have special features that allow the searcher to restrict results to articles that match specific criteria. In other words, only articles of a certain type will be displayed in the search results. These “limiters” can be useful when searching for research or review articles. PubMed has a limiter for article type, which is located on the left sidebar of the search results page. This limiter can filter the search results to show only review articles.

© Concordia University

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List

How to write a review article?

Ömer gülpınar, adil güçal güçlü.

• Author information
• Article notes
• Copyright and License information

Correspondence: Adil Güçal Güçlü, Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine İbni Sina Hospital, Ankara University, 06100 Ankara, Turkey, Phone: +90 312 508 22 58, E-mail: [email protected]

Received 2013 Mar 6; Accepted 2013 May 23.

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.

Keywords: How to write, review, writing

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

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

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

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

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.

• 1. Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Users’ guides to the medical 1 literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1994;272:1367–71. doi: 10.1001/jama.272.17.1367. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 2. Swingler GH, Volmink J, Ioannidis JP. Number of published systematic 2 reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis. BMJ. 2003;327:1083–4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7423.1083. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 3. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Randomized controlled trials 3 registration/application checklist (12/2006) 2006. www.cihrirsc.gc.ca/e/documents/rct_reg_e.pdf (accessed 19 May 2009).
• 4. Mulrow CD. The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106:485–8. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-106-3-485. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 5. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999;354:1896–900. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)04149-5. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 6. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 7. Collins JA, Fauser B. Balancing the strengths of systematicand narrative reviews. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11:103–4. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmh058. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 8. Green BN, Johnson CD, Adams A. Writing narrative literaturereviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. J SportsChiropract Rehabil. 2001;15:5–19. doi: 10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 9. Booth WC, Colomb GG, Williams JM. 2003 Series : Chicago Guides to Writing, Editing and Publishing. 2nd edn. Chicago: The Universty of Chicago Press; 2003. The craft of research. [ Google Scholar ]
• 10. McAlister FA, Clark HD, van Walraven C, Straus SE, Lawson FM, Moher D, et al. The medical review article revisited: has the science improved? Ann Intern Med. 1999;131:947–51. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-131-12-199912210-00007. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 11. Glasziou P, Irwig P, Bain C, Colditz G. Systematic reviews in health care: a practical guide. Cambridge University Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• 12. Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G. Systematic reviews to support evidence based medicine How to review and apply finding of health care research. London: RSM Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• 13. Mulrow C, Cook D, editors. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for health care decisions. Philadelphia: American Collage of Phtsicians; 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
• 14. Glasziou PP, Vandenbroucke J, Chalmers I. Assessing the quality of research. BMJ. 2004;328:39–41. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7430.39. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• View on publisher site
• PDF (239.9 KB)
• Collections

Similar articles

Cited by other articles, links to ncbi databases.

• Download .nbib .nbib
• Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

Add to Collections

Maxwell Library | Bridgewater State University

Today's Hours: 

ILL requests will be temporarily down from 11 AM - 1 PM today, Tuesday 8/27/24

• Maxwell Library
• Scholarly Journals and Popular Magazines
• Differences in Research, Review, and Opinion Articles

Scholarly Journals and Popular Magazines: Differences in Research, Review, and Opinion Articles

• Where Do I Start?
• How Do I Find Peer-Reviewed Articles?
• How Do I Compare Periodical Types?
• Where Can I find More Information?

Research Articles, Reviews, and Opinion Pieces

Scholarly or research articles are written for experts in their fields. They are often peer-reviewed or reviewed by other experts in the field prior to publication. They often have terminology or jargon that is field specific. They are generally lengthy articles. Social science and science scholarly articles have similar structures as do arts and humanities scholarly articles. Not all items in a scholarly journal are peer reviewed. For example, an editorial opinion items can be published in a scholarly journal but the article itself is not scholarly. Scholarly journals may include book reviews or other content that have not been peer reviewed.

Empirical Study: (Original or Primary) based on observation, experimentation, or study. Clinical trials, clinical case studies, and most meta-analyses are empirical studies.

Review Article: (Secondary Sources) Article that summarizes the research in a particular subject, area, or topic. They often include a summary, an literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

Clinical case study (Primary or Original sources): These articles provide real cases from medical or clinical practice. They often include symptoms and diagnosis.

Clinical trials ( Health Research): Th ese articles are often based on large groups of people. They often include methods and control studies. They tend to be lengthy articles.

Opinion Piece:  An opinion piece often includes personal thoughts, beliefs, or feelings or a judgement or conclusion based on facts. The goal may be to persuade or influence the reader that their position on this topic is the best.

Book review: Recent review of books in the field. They may be several pages but tend to be fairly short. 

Social Science and Science Research Articles

The majority of social science and physical science articles include

• Journal Title and Author
• Abstract 
• Introduction with a hypothesis or thesis
• Literature Review
• Methods/Methodology
• Results/Findings

Arts and Humanities Research Articles

In the Arts and Humanities, scholarly articles tend to be less formatted than in the social sciences and sciences. In the humanities, scholars are not conducting the same kinds of research experiments, but they are still using evidence to draw logical conclusions.  Common sections of these articles include:

• an Introduction
• Discussion/Conclusion
• works cited/References/Bibliography

Research versus Review Articles

• 6 Article types that journals publish: A guide for early career researchers
• INFOGRAPHIC: 5 Differences between a research paper and a review paper
• Michigan State University. Empirical vs Review Articles
• UC Merced Library. Empirical & Review Articles
• << Previous: Where Do I Start?
• Next: How Do I Find Peer-Reviewed Articles? >>
• Last Updated: Jan 24, 2024 10:48 AM
• URL: https://library.bridgew.edu/scholarly

Phone: Call us at 508.531.1392 Text: Send a text message to 508.425.4096 Email: [email protected]

Feedback/Comments

Privacy Policy

Website Accessibility

Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Instagram

"How Do I?" @JWULibrary

Sample Question

• JWU-Providence Library

Q. What's the difference between a research article and a review article?

• 35 about the library
• 28 articles & journals
• 1 Borrowing
• 8 citing sources
• 17 company & industry
• 11 computers
• 1 copyright compliance
• 5 countries & travel
• 2 course registration
• 49 databases
• 3 education
• 1 Interlibrary loan
• 5 job search
• 6 libguides
• 9 market research
• 24 my library account
• 12 requests
• 26 research basics
• 21 research topics
• 2 study rooms
• 16 technology
• 7 textbooks
• 42 university
• 3 video tutorial
• 1 writing_help

Answered By: Sarah Naomi Campbell Last Updated: Sep 07, 2018     Views: 218802

Watch this short video to learn about types of scholarly articles, including research articles and literature reviews!

Not in the mood for a video? Read on!

What's the difference between a research article and a review article?

Research articles , sometimes referred to as empirical  or primary sources , report on original research. They will typically include sections such as an introduction, methods, results, and discussion.

Here is a more detailed explanation of research articles .

Review articles , sometimes called literature reviews  or secondary sources , synthesize or analyze research already conducted in primary sources. They generally summarize the current state of research on a given topic.

Here is a more detailed explanation of review articles .

The video above was created by the Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries .

The defintions, and the linked detailed explanations, are paraphrased from the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , 6th ed .

The linked explanations are provided by the Mohawk Valley Community College Libraries .

Links & Files

• How do I find empirical articles in the library databases? Opens in new window
• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 63 No 19

Comments (0)

Related topics.

• about the library
• articles & journals
• citing sources
• company & industry
• copyright compliance
• countries & travel
• course registration
• Interlibrary loan
• market research
• my library account
• research basics
• research topics
• study rooms
• video tutorial
• writing_help

Downcity Library:

111 Dorrance Street Providence, Rhode Island 02903

401-598-1121

Harborside Library:

321 Harborside Boulevard Providence, RI 02905

401-598-1466

• Location and Directions
• Off-Campus Access
• Staff Directory
• Student Employment
• Pay Bills and Fines
• Chat with a Librarian
• Course Reserves
• Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
• Study Rooms
• Research Appointment
• Culinary Museum

Science Research: Primary Sources and Original Research vs. Review Articles

• Additional Web Resources
• Health & Science Databases
• Primary Sources and Original Research vs. Review Articles
• Citation Guides, Generators, and Tools

Original Research vs. Review Articles. How can I tell the Difference?

Research vs review articles.

It's often difficult to tell the difference between original research articles and review articles. Here are some explanations and tips that may help: "Review articles are often as lengthy or even longer that original research articles. What the authors of review articles are doing in analysing and evaluating current research and investigations related to a specific topic, field, or problem. They are not primary sources since they review previously published material. They can be of great value for identifying potentially good primary sources, but they aren't primary themselves. Primary research articles can be identified by a commonly used format. If an article contains the following elements, you can count on it being a primary research article. Look for sections titled:

Methods (sometimes with variations, such as Materials and Methods) Results (usually followed with charts and statistical tables) Discussion

You can also read the abstract to get a good sense of the kind of article that is being presented.

If it is a review article instead of a research article, the abstract should make that pretty clear. If there is no abstract at all, that in itself may be a sign that it is not a primary resource. Short research articles, such as those found in Science and similar scientific publications that mix news, editorials, and forums with research reports, however, may not include any of those elements. In those cases look at the words the authors use, phrases such as "we tested"  and "in our study, we measured" will tell you that the article is reporting on original research."*

*Taken from Ithca College Libraries

Primary and Secondary Sources for Science

In the Sciences, primary sources are documents that provide full description of the original research. For example, a primary source would be a journal article where scientists describe their research on the human immune system. A secondary source would be an article commenting or analyzing the scientists' research on the human immune system.

  EXAMPLES OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCES

Source: The Evolution of Scientific Information (from  Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science , vol. 26).

Primary Vs. Secondary Vs. Tertiary Sources

• << Previous: Books
• Next: Citation Guides, Generators, and Tools >>
• Last Updated: Nov 16, 2023 1:58 PM
• URL: https://andersonuniversity.libguides.com/ScienceResearch

Thrift Library | (864) 231-2050 | [email protected] | Anderson University 316 Boulevard Anderson, SC 29621