Randykitty (talk | contribs) |
Explanation in JAMA of the benefits of review articles. |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Review articles''' are an attempt to summarize the current state of understanding on a topic.<ref>{{cite web|title=What’s a “Review Article?”|url=http://www.lib.utexas.edu/lsl/help/modules/review.html|work=The University of Texas|accessdate=8 June 2011}}</ref> They analyze or discuss research previously published by others, rather than reporting new [[experiment]]al results.<ref name=John>{{cite web|last=John Siegel, MLS|title=Have I Found A Scholarly Article?|url=http://ualr.libguides.com/content.php?pid=183010&sid=1538831}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lib.sfu.ca/help/publication-types/scholarly-journals#review |title=What is a Scholarly Journal? | SFU Library |publisher=Lib.sfu.ca |date=2013-03-21 |accessdate=2013-06-19}}</ref> |
'''Review articles''' are an attempt to summarize the current state of understanding on a topic.<ref>{{cite web|title=What’s a “Review Article?”|url=http://www.lib.utexas.edu/lsl/help/modules/review.html|work=The University of Texas|accessdate=8 June 2011}}</ref> They analyze or discuss research previously published by others, rather than reporting new [[experiment]]al results.<ref name=John>{{cite web|last=John Siegel, MLS|title=Have I Found A Scholarly Article?|url=http://ualr.libguides.com/content.php?pid=183010&sid=1538831}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lib.sfu.ca/help/publication-types/scholarly-journals#review |title=What is a Scholarly Journal? | SFU Library |publisher=Lib.sfu.ca |date=2013-03-21 |accessdate=2013-06-19}}</ref> |
||
An expert's opinion is valuable, but an expert's assessment of the literature can be more valuable. When reading individual articles, readers could miss features that are apparent to an expert clinician-researcher. Readers benefit from the expert's explanation and assessment of the validity and applicability of individual studies.<ref name="Rethlefsen">{{cite journal |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
| title =Engaging Medical Librarians to Improve the Quality of Review Articles |
|||
| journal =JAMA. |
|||
| date =September 10, 2014 |
|||
| authors =Melissa L. Rethlefsen, M. Hassan Murad, Edward H. Livingston, |
|||
| volume =312 |
|||
| issue =10 |
|||
| pages =999-1000. |
|||
| url =http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleID=1902238 |
|||
| doi =10.1001/jama.2014.9263. |
|||
| pmid = |
|||
| pmc = |
|||
}}</ref> |
|||
| ⚫ | Review articles come in the form of [[systematic review]]s and [[literature reviews]] and are a form of [[secondary literature]].<ref name=Berk>{{cite web|title=Scientific Literature|url=http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/BIOS/bio1bscholcomm.html|work=The Regents of the University of California}}</ref> Systematic reviews determine an objective list of criteria, and find all previously published original experimental papers that meet the criteria. They then compare the results presented in these papers. Literature reviews, by contrast, provide a summary of what the authors believe are the best and most relevant prior publications. |
||
Some [[academic journal]]s likewise specialize in review of a field; they are known as [[review journal]]s. |
Some [[academic journal]]s likewise specialize in review of a field; they are known as [[review journal]]s. |
||
Revision as of 22:11, 11 September 2014
Review articles are an attempt to summarize the current state of understanding on a topic.[1] They analyze or discuss research previously published by others, rather than reporting new experimental results.[2][3]
An expert's opinion is valuable, but an expert's assessment of the literature can be more valuable. When reading individual articles, readers could miss features that are apparent to an expert clinician-researcher. Readers benefit from the expert's explanation and assessment of the validity and applicability of individual studies.[4]
Review articles come in the form of systematic reviews and literature reviews and are a form of secondary literature.[5] Systematic reviews determine an objective list of criteria, and find all previously published original experimental papers that meet the criteria. They then compare the results presented in these papers. Literature reviews, by contrast, provide a summary of what the authors believe are the best and most relevant prior publications.
Some academic journals likewise specialize in review of a field; they are known as review journals.
The concept of "review article" is separate from the concept of peer-reviewed literature. It is possible for a review to be peer-reviewed, and it is possible for a review to be non-peer-reviewed.
See also
- Book review, a completely unrelated type of publication
- Case series, sometimes called a clinical review because it reviews or summarizes the records for a series of patients at a single medical clinic
- Review journal
References
- ^ "What's a "Review Article?"". The University of Texas. Retrieved 8 June 2011.
- ^ John Siegel, MLS. "Have I Found A Scholarly Article?".
- ^ "What is a Scholarly Journal? | SFU Library". Lib.sfu.ca. 2013-03-21. Retrieved 2013-06-19.
- ^ "Engaging Medical Librarians to Improve the Quality of Review Articles". JAMA. 312 (10): 999-1000. September 10, 2014. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.9263.
{{cite journal}}: Check|doi=value (help); Cite uses deprecated parameter|authors=(help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) - ^ "Scientific Literature". The Regents of the University of California.
- Woodward, A. M. (1977). The Roles of Reviews in Information Transfer. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 175-180.