Writing a narrative biomedical review: Considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors

Armen Yuri Gasparyan; Lilit Ayvazyan; Heather Blackmore; George D. Kitas

doi:10.1007/s00296-011-1999-3

Writing a narrative biomedical review: Considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors

Armen Yuri Gasparyan, Lilit Ayvazyan, Heather Blackmore, George D. Kitas

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Review articles comprehensively covering a specific topic are crucial for successful research and academic projects. Most editors consider review articles for special and regular issues of journals. Writing a review requires deep knowledge and understanding of a field. The aim of this review is to analyze the main steps in writing a narrative biomedical review and to consider points that may increase the chances of success. We performed a comprehensive search through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science using the following keywords: review of the literature, narrative review, title, abstract, authorship, ethics, peer review, research methods, medical writing, scientific writing, and writing standards. Opinions expressed in the review are also based on personal experience as authors, peer reviewers, and editors. © 2011 Springer-Verlag.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1409-1417
Number of pages	8
Journal	Rheumatology International
Volume	31
Issue number	11
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-011-1999-3
Publication status	Published - Nov 2011

Keywords

Abstract
Authorship
Ethics
Medical writing
Narrative review
Peer-review
Research methods
Title

Access to Document

10.1007/s00296-011-1999-3

Cite this

@article{f703da94a9d7400ca84e83cd1b6ecae4,

title = "Writing a narrative biomedical review: Considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors",

abstract = "Review articles comprehensively covering a specific topic are crucial for successful research and academic projects. Most editors consider review articles for special and regular issues of journals. Writing a review requires deep knowledge and understanding of a field. The aim of this review is to analyze the main steps in writing a narrative biomedical review and to consider points that may increase the chances of success. We performed a comprehensive search through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science using the following keywords: review of the literature, narrative review, title, abstract, authorship, ethics, peer review, research methods, medical writing, scientific writing, and writing standards. Opinions expressed in the review are also based on personal experience as authors, peer reviewers, and editors. {\textcopyright} 2011 Springer-Verlag.",

keywords = "Abstract, Authorship, Ethics, Medical writing, Narrative review, Peer-review, Research methods, Title",

author = "Gasparyan, {Armen Yuri} and Lilit Ayvazyan and Heather Blackmore and Kitas, {George D.}",

year = "2011",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1007/s00296-011-1999-3",

language = "English",

volume = "31",

pages = "1409--1417",

journal = "Rheumatology International",

issn = "0172-8172",

publisher = "Springer Nature",

number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Writing a narrative biomedical review: Considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors

AU - Gasparyan, Armen Yuri

AU - Ayvazyan, Lilit

AU - Blackmore, Heather

AU - Kitas, George D.

PY - 2011/11

Y1 - 2011/11

N2 - Review articles comprehensively covering a specific topic are crucial for successful research and academic projects. Most editors consider review articles for special and regular issues of journals. Writing a review requires deep knowledge and understanding of a field. The aim of this review is to analyze the main steps in writing a narrative biomedical review and to consider points that may increase the chances of success. We performed a comprehensive search through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science using the following keywords: review of the literature, narrative review, title, abstract, authorship, ethics, peer review, research methods, medical writing, scientific writing, and writing standards. Opinions expressed in the review are also based on personal experience as authors, peer reviewers, and editors. © 2011 Springer-Verlag.

AB - Review articles comprehensively covering a specific topic are crucial for successful research and academic projects. Most editors consider review articles for special and regular issues of journals. Writing a review requires deep knowledge and understanding of a field. The aim of this review is to analyze the main steps in writing a narrative biomedical review and to consider points that may increase the chances of success. We performed a comprehensive search through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science using the following keywords: review of the literature, narrative review, title, abstract, authorship, ethics, peer review, research methods, medical writing, scientific writing, and writing standards. Opinions expressed in the review are also based on personal experience as authors, peer reviewers, and editors. © 2011 Springer-Verlag.

KW - Abstract

KW - Authorship

KW - Ethics

KW - Medical writing

KW - Narrative review

KW - Peer-review

KW - Research methods

KW - Title

U2 - 10.1007/s00296-011-1999-3

DO - 10.1007/s00296-011-1999-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 21800117

SN - 0172-8172

VL - 31

SP - 1409

EP - 1417

JO - Rheumatology International

JF - Rheumatology International

IS - 11

ER -

Writing a narrative biomedical review: Considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this