what is article review format

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 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
This Or That Game New
Train Your Brain
Explore More
Support wikiHow
About wikiHow
Log in / Sign up
Education and Communications
Critical Reviews

How to Write an Article Review

Last Updated: September 8, 2023 Fact Checked

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 13 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 3,085,244 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."

Things You Should Know

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. [1] X Research source

Preparing to Write Your Review

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.

Writing the Article Review

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. [10] 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.

Sample Article Reviews

Expert Q&A

↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/grammarpunct/proofreading/
↑ 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

Oct 25, 2023

Vanita Meghrajani

Jul 21, 2016

Featured Articles

How to Block Cookies in Chrome, Safari, & More

Watch Articles

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

Get all the best how-tos!

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).

Our specialists will write a custom essay specially for you!

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.

Just in 1 hour! We will write you a plagiarism-free paper in hardly more than 1 hour

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

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.

✍️ 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.

Receive a plagiarism-free paper tailored to your instructions. Cut 20% off your first order!

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:

Its topic.
Its type.
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.

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.

Get an originally-written paper according to your instructions!

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.

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.

✅ 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.

📝 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
Article Review: University of South Australia
How to Write a Journal Article Review: University of Newcastle Library Guides
Writing Help: The Article Review: Central Michigan University Libraries
Write a Critical Review of a Scientific Journal Article: McLaughlin Library
Share to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to LinkedIn
Share to email

How to Write a Short Essay: Format & Examples

Short essays answer a specific question on the subject. They usually are anywhere between 250 words and 750 words long. A paper with less than 250 words isn’t considered a finished text, so it doesn’t fall under the category of a short essay. Essays of such format are required for...

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 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: process analysis and its typesa process analysis outline tipsfree examples and other tips that might be helpful for your college assignment So,...

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...

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:

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? Get our essay writing service 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

How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

Did you know that article reviews are not just academic exercises but also a valuable skill in today's information age? In a world inundated with content, being able to dissect and evaluate articles critically can help you separate the wheat from the chaff. Whether you're a student aiming to excel in your coursework or a professional looking to stay well-informed, mastering the art of writing article reviews is an invaluable skill.

Short Description

In this article, our research paper writing service experts will start by unraveling the concept of article reviews and discussing the various types. You'll also gain insights into the art of formatting your review effectively. To ensure you're well-prepared, we'll take you through the pre-writing process, offering tips on setting the stage for your review. But it doesn't stop there. You'll find a practical example of an article review to help you grasp the concepts in action. To complete your journey, we'll guide you through the post-writing process, equipping you with essential proofreading techniques to ensure your work shines with clarity and precision!

What Is an Article Review: Grasping the Concept

A review article is a type of professional paper writing that demands a high level of in-depth analysis and a well-structured presentation of arguments. It is a critical, constructive evaluation of literature in a particular field through summary, classification, analysis, and comparison.

If you write a scientific review, you have to use database searches to portray the research. Your primary goal is to summarize everything and present a clear understanding of the topic you've been working on.

Writing Involves:

Summarization, classification, analysis, critiques, and comparison.
The analysis, evaluation, and comparison require the use of theories, ideas, and research relevant to the subject area of the article.
It is also worth nothing if a review does not introduce new information, but instead presents a response to another writer's work.
Check out other samples to gain a better understanding of how to review the article.

Types of Review

When it comes to article reviews, there's more than one way to approach the task. Understanding the various types of reviews is like having a versatile toolkit at your disposal. In this section, we'll walk you through the different dimensions of review types, each offering a unique perspective and purpose. Whether you're dissecting a scholarly article, critiquing a piece of literature, or evaluating a product, you'll discover the diverse landscape of article reviews and how to navigate it effectively.

Journal Article Review

Just like other types of reviews, a journal article review assesses the merits and shortcomings of a published work. To illustrate, consider a review of an academic paper on climate change, where the writer meticulously analyzes and interprets the article's significance within the context of environmental science.

Research Article Review

Distinguished by its focus on research methodologies, a research article review scrutinizes the techniques used in a study and evaluates them in light of the subsequent analysis and critique. For instance, when reviewing a research article on the effects of a new drug, the reviewer would delve into the methods employed to gather data and assess their reliability.

Science Article Review

In the realm of scientific literature, a science article review encompasses a wide array of subjects. Scientific publications often provide extensive background information, which can be instrumental in conducting a comprehensive analysis. For example, when reviewing an article about the latest breakthroughs in genetics, the reviewer may draw upon the background knowledge provided to facilitate a more in-depth evaluation of the publication.

Need a Hand From Professionals?

Address to Our Writers and Get Assistance in Any Questions!

Formatting an Article Review

The format of the article should always adhere to the citation style required by your professor. If you're not sure, seek clarification on the preferred format and ask him to clarify several other pointers to complete the formatting of an article review adequately.

How Many Publications Should You Review?

In what format should you cite your articles (MLA, APA, ASA, Chicago, etc.)?
What length should your review be?
Should you include a summary, critique, or personal opinion in your assignment?
Do you need to call attention to a theme or central idea within the articles?
Does your instructor require background information?

When you know the answers to these questions, you may start writing your assignment. Below are examples of MLA and APA formats, as those are the two most common citation styles.

Using the APA Format

Articles appear most commonly in academic journals, newspapers, and websites. If you write an article review in the APA format, you will need to write bibliographical entries for the sources you use:

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

Using MLA Format

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

Enhance your writing effortlessly with EssayPro.com , where you can order an article review or any other writing task. Our team of expert writers specializes in various fields, ensuring your work is not just summarized, but deeply analyzed and professionally presented. Ideal for students and professionals alike, EssayPro offers top-notch writing assistance tailored to your needs. Elevate your writing today with our skilled team at your article review writing service !

The Pre-Writing Process

Facing this task for the first time can really get confusing and can leave you unsure of where to begin. To create a top-notch article review, start with a few preparatory steps. Here are the two main stages from our dissertation services to get you started:

Step 1: Define the right organization for your review. Knowing the future setup of your paper will help you define how you should read the article. Here are the steps to follow:

Summarize the article — seek out the main points, ideas, claims, and general information presented in the article.
Define the positive points — identify the strong aspects, ideas, and insightful observations the author has made.
Find the gaps —- determine whether or not the author has any contradictions, gaps, or inconsistencies in the article and evaluate whether or not he or she used a sufficient amount of arguments and information to support his or her ideas.
Identify unanswered questions — finally, identify if there are any questions left unanswered after reading the piece.

Step 2: Move on and review the article. Here is a small and simple guide to help you do it right:

Start off by looking at and assessing the title of the piece, its abstract, introductory part, headings and subheadings, opening sentences in its paragraphs, and its conclusion.
First, read only the beginning and the ending of the piece (introduction and conclusion). These are the parts where authors include all of their key arguments and points. Therefore, if you start with reading these parts, it will give you a good sense of the author's main points.
Finally, read the article fully.

These three steps make up most of the prewriting process. After you are done with them, you can move on to writing your own review—and we are going to guide you through the writing process as well.

Outline and Template

As you progress with reading your article, organize your thoughts into coherent sections in an outline. As you read, jot down important facts, contributions, or contradictions. Identify the shortcomings and strengths of your publication. Begin to map your outline accordingly.

If your professor does not want a summary section or a personal critique section, then you must alleviate those parts from your writing. Much like other assignments, an article review must contain an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Thus, you might consider dividing your outline according to these sections as well as subheadings within the body. If you find yourself troubled with the pre-writing and the brainstorming process for this assignment, seek out a sample outline.

Your custom essay must contain these constituent parts:

Pre-Title Page - Before diving into your review, start with essential details: article type, publication title, and author names with affiliations (position, department, institution, location, and email). Include corresponding author info if needed.
Running Head - In APA format, use a concise title (under 40 characters) to ensure consistent formatting.
Summary Page - Optional but useful. Summarize the article in 800 words, covering background, purpose, results, and methodology, avoiding verbatim text or references.
Title Page - Include the full title, a 250-word abstract, and 4-6 keywords for discoverability.
Introduction - Set the stage with an engaging overview of the article.
Body - Organize your analysis with headings and subheadings.
Works Cited/References - Properly cite all sources used in your review.
Optional Suggested Reading Page - If permitted, suggest further readings for in-depth exploration.
Tables and Figure Legends (if instructed by the professor) - Include visuals when requested by your professor for clarity.

Example of an Article Review

You might wonder why we've dedicated a section of this article to discuss an article review sample. Not everyone may realize it, but examining multiple well-constructed examples of review articles is a crucial step in the writing process. In the following section, our essay writing service experts will explain why.

Looking through relevant article review examples can be beneficial for you in the following ways:

To get you introduced to the key works of experts in your field.
To help you identify the key people engaged in a particular field of science.
To help you define what significant discoveries and advances were made in your field.
To help you unveil the major gaps within the existing knowledge of your field—which contributes to finding fresh solutions.
To help you find solid references and arguments for your own review.
To help you generate some ideas about any further field of research.
To help you gain a better understanding of the area and become an expert in this specific field.
To get a clear idea of how to write a good review.

View Our Writer’s Sample Before Crafting Your Own!

Why Have There Been No Great Female Artists?

Steps for Writing an Article Review

Here is a guide with critique paper format on how to write a review paper:

Step 1: Write the Title

First of all, you need to write a title that reflects the main focus of your work. Respectively, the title can be either interrogative, descriptive, or declarative.

Step 2: Cite the Article

Next, create a proper citation for the reviewed article and input it following the title. At this step, the most important thing to keep in mind is the style of citation specified by your instructor in the requirements for the paper. For example, an article citation in the MLA style should look as follows:

Author's last and first name. "The title of the article." Journal's title and issue(publication date): page(s). Print

Abraham John. "The World of Dreams." Virginia Quarterly 60.2(1991): 125-67. Print.

Step 3: Article Identification

After your citation, you need to include the identification of your reviewed article:

Title of the article
Title of the journal
Year of publication

All of this information should be included in the first paragraph of your paper.

The report "Poverty increases school drop-outs" was written by Brian Faith – a Health officer – in 2000.

Step 4: Introduction

Your organization in an assignment like this is of the utmost importance. Before embarking on your writing process, you should outline your assignment or use an article review template to organize your thoughts coherently.

If you are wondering how to start an article review, begin with an introduction that mentions the article and your thesis for the review.
Follow up with a summary of the main points of the article.
Highlight the positive aspects and facts presented in the publication.
Critique the publication by identifying gaps, contradictions, disparities in the text, and unanswered questions.

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Make a summary of the article by revisiting what the author has written about. Note any relevant facts and findings from the article. Include the author's conclusions in this section.

Step 6: Critique It

Present the strengths and weaknesses you have found in the publication. Highlight the knowledge that the author has contributed to the field. Also, write about any gaps and/or contradictions you have found in the article. Take a standpoint of either supporting or not supporting the author's assertions, but back up your arguments with facts and relevant theories that are pertinent to that area of knowledge. Rubrics and templates can also be used to evaluate and grade the person who wrote the article.

Step 7: Craft a Conclusion

In this section, revisit the critical points of your piece, your findings in the article, and your critique. Also, write about the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the results of the article review. Present a way forward for future research in the field of study. Before submitting your article, keep these pointers in mind:

As you read the article, highlight the key points. This will help you pinpoint the article's main argument and the evidence that they used to support that argument.
While you write your review, use evidence from your sources to make a point. This is best done using direct quotations.
Select quotes and supporting evidence adequately and use direct quotations sparingly. Take time to analyze the article adequately.
Every time you reference a publication or use a direct quotation, use a parenthetical citation to avoid accidentally plagiarizing your article.
Re-read your piece a day after you finish writing it. This will help you to spot grammar mistakes and to notice any flaws in your organization.
Use a spell-checker and get a second opinion on your paper.

The Post-Writing Process: Proofread Your Work

Finally, when all of the parts of your article review are set and ready, you have one last thing to take care of — proofreading. Although students often neglect this step, proofreading is a vital part of the writing process and will help you polish your paper to ensure that there are no mistakes or inconsistencies.

To proofread your paper properly, start by reading it fully and checking the following points:

Punctuation
Other mistakes

Afterward, take a moment to check for any unnecessary information in your paper and, if found, consider removing it to streamline your content. Finally, double-check that you've covered at least 3-4 key points in your discussion.

And remember, if you ever need help with proofreading, rewriting your essay, or even want to buy essay , our friendly team is always here to assist you.

Need an Article REVIEW WRITTEN?

Just send us the requirements to your paper and watch one of our writers crafting an original paper for you.

How to Write a Policy Analysis Paper Step-by-Step

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

4 Ways to Play Games Online

7 ways to fix kinect problems on xbox one, 4 ways to see who super swiped you on bumble, 3 ways to wire an amp to a sub and head unit, how to make an animated short film, 3 ways to sell a washer and dryer, how to become a tattoo apprentice: 16 steps, 3 ways to feed a red-eared slider turtle, 3 easy ways to measure torso length, how to crimp a wire: 11 steps, 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

3 Ways to Impress a Girl in High School

6 Ways to Make Your Hair Thicker

3 Ways to Roll Your “R”s

3 Ways to Be Street Smart

How to Add Fruit to Jello: 14 Steps

How to Tame a Wild Rabbit: 12 Steps

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

A Research Guide
Writing Guide
Article Writing

How To Write an Article Review

Definition of article review
Why do students write article reviews
Types of article review
Structure and outline
Step-by-step guide

Article review format

How to write a good article review
Article review examples

Definition of article review assignments

Why do students write article reviews.

Article writing is a deeply analytical process that helps students to correct vague terms when and if they are present. Likewise, when composing an article review or an original assignment, such work provides more clarity regarding using appropriate words. If an article has colloquial language or logical gaps, it is one of those aspects to mention in an article review. It also allows writers to determine whether certain terms must be replaced and edited.
Article review essay writing helps to clarify scientific questions.
Writing an article review allows students to see and understand how others approach specific issues and what perspectives should be studied regarding the problems at hand. Once a person reads the review, it makes it easier to get rid of bias.
Article review assignments also provide students with editing and grammar work to help with more accurate papers.
Most importantly, an article review is a way to encourage better work and provide critical analysis with due criticism and evaluation of the original article.

Types of article review tasks

Original Research Article Review. The original research article review is close to what is often seen as the literature review. An author must explore the author’s hypothesis and some background studies with due analysis to outline scientific methods. It’s one of the most challenging tasks to write as one must interpret the findings and talk about future implications. This type of work can also get lengthy and be up to 6,000 words in subjects like History or Sociology.
Critical Analysis. As the name implies, it critically evaluates the author’s work and can be up to 3,000 words.
Literature Review. It stands for the review of secondary literature sources. As a rule, such reviews do not present much new data and only evaluate the importance of sources and information that supports the author’s arguments.
Systematic Review. This case stands for research questions and articles that require a deeper synthesis of available facts or certain evidence. The purpose here is to define and evaluate the quality of the data obtained by the author.
Meta-Analysis Reviews. Once again, it is a systematic review focusing on a specific topic, the literature issues. You must provide a special quantitative estimate for exposure and intervention.
Clinical Trial Reviews. It means that one must provide a study related to an investigation offered by the author. It can relate to a drug or talk about a sample group of people, thus bringing it into the field of a defined population or a group of participants.
Perspective or Opinion Article Review. This is where one poses an opinion, meaning things can get biased toward a certain opinion. In writing a good review, a student can look for perspectives and evaluate the importance of the original article. Likewise, posing an opinion is one of the obligatory aspects.

Article review structure and outline

Article review structure.

Title page.
An article introduction presenting the main subject and/or a problem.
Brief article summary.
Critical article evaluation and/or a summary.
Conclusion with the moral lesson and discussion on the findings’ pros/cons.
Bibliography with relevant citations.

Article review outline

You provide an evaluation and summary of the author’s article.
Your audience can receive sufficient knowledge regarding the subject.
You have made points about the strongest arguments of the author.
You have criticized the author’s work and explained how it contributes to the scientific field.
You conclude your article review with your original thoughts and opinions without turning to additional research unless the grading rubric required it.

Step-by-step writing guide

Step 1: learn about the article’s agenda., step 2: summarize the main article ideas, step 3: organization aspect of the review, step 4: article preview and take notes, step 5: paraphrasing and analysis, step 6: final evaluation.

An introduction. The topic of your study must be mentioned here in the first sentence. Indicate what your article contains and talk about the author’s background. Provide an order of the subjects you plan to discuss to explain what your readers expect. The introduction should provide the author’s claims and the main arguments that result in your thesis statement. When writing an introduction, you must determine the main argument.
Body paragraphs. This is where you provide an evaluation with a summary and write about the author’s work.
Conclusion. Speak of your reasons for providing a review and talk about whether you could support your thesis and what you have learned.
Works Cited page. Refer to your grading rubric to identify what citation style must be used.

How to write a good article review?

Do not write the statements in the first person. It is recommended to use the third person instead by turning to a formal academic tone.
Your introduction with the information about the original article should take from 10 to 25% of your assignment’s volume.
An introduction must end with a strong thesis and make an assumption or research the author’s main claim. A typical thesis to start an article review for an assignment may look this way:
Write down all the important points and share your findings. It will help to show that you have done your homework correctly.
Discuss how the article supports the claims and whether it provides good evidence.
Always provide background information about the author.
Use direct quotes to support your claims by turning to the original article.
Read your summary twice to evaluate whether it follows the main thesis.
Talk about the contributions of the author to the academic community.
Provide reasons for whether you support the author’s view or not. Why or why not?
Summarize all the important points in a conclusion part.

Why choose article review examples?

Wright State University’s Journal Article Review Example .
University of Illinois Springfield’s Article How-to Review Guide .
UC Merced Library’s Article Review Sample
Identify recent and important changes in your field of study.
Determine who works in a specific field of science and why.
Narrow things down and identify essential information to help you start with research.
Use obtained information in school debates, and references work.
Generate new ideas and conduct lab experiments.
Write an article review through the lens of personal experience and expertise.

Receive paper in 3 Hours!

Choose the number of pages.
Select your deadline.
Complete your order.

Number of Pages

550 words (double spaced)

Deadline: 10 days left

By clicking "Log In", you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We'll occasionally send you account related and promo emails.

Forget about ChatGPT and get quality content right away.

Get Started

Take the first step and invest in your future.

Online Programs

Offering flexibility & convenience in 51 online degrees & programs.

Prairie Stars

Featuring 15 intercollegiate NCAA Div II athletic teams.

Find your Fit

UIS has over 85 student and 10 greek life organizations, and many volunteer opportunities.

Arts & Culture

Celebrating the arts to create rich cultural experiences on campus.

Give Like a Star

Your generosity helps fuel fundraising for scholarships, programs and new initiatives.

Bragging Rights

UIS was listed No. 1 in Illinois and No. 3 in the Midwest in 2023 rankings.

Quick links Applicants & Students Important Apps & Links Alumni Faculty and Staff Community Admissions How to Apply Cost & Aid Tuition Calculator Registrar Orientation Visit Campus Academics Register for Class Programs of Study Online Degrees & Programs Graduate Education International Student Services Study Away Student Support Bookstore UIS Life Dining Diversity & Inclusion Get Involved Health & Wellness COVID-19 United in Safety Residence Life Student Life Programs UIS Connection Important Apps UIS Mobile App Advise U Canvas myUIS i-card Balance Pay My Bill - UIS Bursar Self-Service Email Resources Bookstore Box Information Technology Services Library Orbit Policies Webtools Get Connected Area Information Calendar Campus Recreation Departments & Programs (A-Z) Parking UIS Newsroom Connect & Get Involved Update your Info Alumni Events Alumni Networks & Groups Volunteer Opportunities Alumni Board News & Publications Featured Alumni Alumni News UIS Alumni Magazine Resources Order your Transcripts Give Back Alumni Programs Career Development Services & Support Accessibility Services Campus Services Campus Police Facilities & Services Registrar Faculty & Staff Resources Website Project Request Web Services Training & Tools Academic Impressions Career Connect CSA Reporting Cybersecurity Training Faculty Research FERPA Training Website Login Campus Resources Newsroom Campus Calendar Campus Maps i-Card Human Resources Public Relations Webtools Arts & Events UIS Performing Arts Center Visual Arts Gallery Event Calendar Sangamon Experience Center for Lincoln Studies ECCE Speaker Series Community Engagement Center for State Policy and Leadership Illinois Innocence Project Innovate Springfield Central IL Nonprofit Resource Center NPR Illinois Community Resources Child Protection Training Academy Office of Electronic Media University Archives/IRAD Institute for Illinois Public Finance

Request Info

How to Review a Journal Article

Request Info Request info for.... Undergraduate/Graduate Online Study Away Continuing & Professional Education International Student Services General Inquiries

For many kinds of assignments, like a literature review , you may be asked to offer a critique or review of a journal article. This is an opportunity for you as a scholar to offer your qualified opinion and evaluation of how another scholar has composed their article, argument, and research. That means you will be expected to go beyond a simple summary of the article and evaluate it on a deeper level. As a college student, this might sound intimidating. However, as you engage with the research process, you are becoming immersed in a particular topic, and your insights about the way that topic is presented are valuable and can contribute to the overall conversation surrounding your topic.

IMPORTANT NOTE!!

Some disciplines, like Criminal Justice, may only want you to summarize the article without including your opinion or evaluation. If your assignment is to summarize the article only, please see our literature review handout.

Before getting started on the critique, it is important to review the article thoroughly and critically. To do this, we recommend take notes, annotating , and reading the article several times before critiquing. As you read, be sure to note important items like the thesis, purpose, research questions, hypotheses, methods, evidence, key findings, major conclusions, tone, and publication information. Depending on your writing context, some of these items may not be applicable.

Questions to Consider

To evaluate a source, consider some of the following questions. They are broken down into different categories, but answering these questions will help you consider what areas to examine. With each category, we recommend identifying the strengths and weaknesses in each since that is a critical part of evaluation.

Evaluating Purpose and Argument

How well is the purpose made clear in the introduction through background/context and thesis?
How well does the abstract represent and summarize the article’s major points and argument?
How well does the objective of the experiment or of the observation fill a need for the field?
How well is the argument/purpose articulated and discussed throughout the body of the text?
How well does the discussion maintain cohesion?

Evaluating the Presentation/Organization of Information

How appropriate and clear is the title of the article?
Where could the author have benefited from expanding, condensing, or omitting ideas?
How clear are the author’s statements? Challenge ambiguous statements.
What underlying assumptions does the author have, and how does this affect the credibility or clarity of their article?
How objective is the author in his or her discussion of the topic?
How well does the organization fit the article’s purpose and articulate key goals?

Evaluating Methods

How appropriate are the study design and methods for the purposes of the study?
How detailed are the methods being described? Is the author leaving out important steps or considerations?
Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable the reader to duplicate them?

Evaluating Data

Scan and spot-check calculations. Are the statistical methods appropriate?
Do you find any content repeated or duplicated?
How many errors of fact and interpretation does the author include? (You can check on this by looking up the references the author cites).
What pertinent literature has the author cited, and have they used this literature appropriately?

Following, we have an example of a summary and an evaluation of a research article. Note that in most literature review contexts, the summary and evaluation would be much shorter. This extended example shows the different ways a student can critique and write about an article.

Chik, A. (2012). Digital gameplay for autonomous foreign language learning: Gamers’ and language teachers’ perspectives. In H. Reinders (ed.), Digital games in language learning and teaching (pp. 95-114). Eastbourne, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Be sure to include the full citation either in a reference page or near your evaluation if writing an annotated bibliography .

In Chik’s article “Digital Gameplay for Autonomous Foreign Language Learning: Gamers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives”, she explores the ways in which “digital gamers manage gaming and gaming-related activities to assume autonomy in their foreign language learning,” (96) which is presented in contrast to how teachers view the “pedagogical potential” of gaming. The research was described as an “umbrella project” consisting of two parts. The first part examined 34 language teachers’ perspectives who had limited experience with gaming (only five stated they played games regularly) (99). Their data was recorded through a survey, class discussion, and a seven-day gaming trial done by six teachers who recorded their reflections through personal blog posts. The second part explored undergraduate gaming habits of ten Hong Kong students who were regular gamers. Their habits were recorded through language learning histories, videotaped gaming sessions, blog entries of gaming practices, group discussion sessions, stimulated recall sessions on gaming videos, interviews with other gamers, and posts from online discussion forums. The research shows that while students recognize the educational potential of games and have seen benefits of it in their lives, the instructors overall do not see the positive impacts of gaming on foreign language learning.

The summary includes the article’s purpose, methods, results, discussion, and citations when necessary.

This article did a good job representing the undergraduate gamers’ voices through extended quotes and stories. Particularly for the data collection of the undergraduate gamers, there were many opportunities for an in-depth examination of their gaming practices and histories. However, the representation of the teachers in this study was very uneven when compared to the students. Not only were teachers labeled as numbers while the students picked out their own pseudonyms, but also when viewing the data collection, the undergraduate students were more closely examined in comparison to the teachers in the study. While the students have fifteen extended quotes describing their experiences in their research section, the teachers only have two of these instances in their section, which shows just how imbalanced the study is when presenting instructor voices.

Some research methods, like the recorded gaming sessions, were only used with students whereas teachers were only asked to blog about their gaming experiences. This creates a richer narrative for the students while also failing to give instructors the chance to have more nuanced perspectives. This lack of nuance also stems from the emphasis of the non-gamer teachers over the gamer teachers. The non-gamer teachers’ perspectives provide a stark contrast to the undergraduate gamer experiences and fits neatly with the narrative of teachers not valuing gaming as an educational tool. However, the study mentioned five teachers that were regular gamers whose perspectives are left to a short section at the end of the presentation of the teachers’ results. This was an opportunity to give the teacher group a more complex story, and the opportunity was entirely missed.

Additionally, the context of this study was not entirely clear. The instructors were recruited through a master’s level course, but the content of the course and the institution’s background is not discussed. Understanding this context helps us understand the course’s purpose(s) and how those purposes may have influenced the ways in which these teachers interpreted and saw games. It was also unclear how Chik was connected to this masters’ class and to the students. Why these particular teachers and students were recruited was not explicitly defined and also has the potential to skew results in a particular direction.

Overall, I was inclined to agree with the idea that students can benefit from language acquisition through gaming while instructors may not see the instructional value, but I believe the way the research was conducted and portrayed in this article made it very difficult to support Chik’s specific findings.

Some professors like you to begin an evaluation with something positive but isn’t always necessary.

The evaluation is clearly organized and uses transitional phrases when moving to a new topic.

This evaluation includes a summative statement that gives the overall impression of the article at the end, but this can also be placed at the beginning of the evaluation.

This evaluation mainly discusses the representation of data and methods. However, other areas, like organization, are open to critique.

404 Not found

How to Write an Article Review That Stands Out

An article review is a critical assessment of another writer’s research paper or scholarly article. Such an activity aims to expand one’s knowledge by evaluating the original author’s research.

Of course, writing an article review could be tricky. But a few expert tips and tricks can get you on the right track. That’s what this interesting blog post is all about. So, ensure you read it till the end to make the most out of it.

Table of Contents

A Step-by-step Guide on How to Write an Article Review

Master the art of writing an article review with this step-by-step guide from professional paper help providers.

Step 1: Select the Right Article

The first step is to pick a suitable article for a review. Choose a scholarly source that’s connected to your area of study. You can look for pieces printed in trustworthy journals or by respected authors.

For Example:

For reviewing an article on climate change, consider selecting one from scientific journals like Nature or Science.

Step 2: Read and Understand the Article

It’s super important to read and understand the article before writing your review. Read the article a few times and jot down the notes as you go. Focus on the main arguments, major points, evidence, and how it’s structured.

Let’s say you’re looking at an article on how social media affects mental health. Ensure to take note of the following:

The number of people involved
How the data is analyzed
The Results

Step 3: Structure and Introduction

To start a solid review, start with an introduction that gives readers the background info they need. Must include the article’s title, the author, and where it was published. Also, write a summary of the main point or argument in the article.

“In the article ‘The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health by John Smith, published in the Journal of Psychology:

The author examines the correlation between excessive social media usage and adolescent mental health disorders.”

Step 4: Summarize the Article

In this part, you’ll need to quickly go over the main points and arguments from the article. Make it short but must cover the most important elements and the evidence that backs them up. Leave your opinions and analysis out of it for now.

For instance, you could write:

“The author discusses various studies highlighting the negative effects of excessive social media usage on mental health.

Smith’s research reveals a significant correlation between

Increased social media consumption and higher rates of anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem among teenagers.

The article also explores the underlying mechanisms, such as social comparison and cyberbullying. All are contributing to the adverse mental health outcomes.”

Step 5: Critically Analyze and Evaluate

Now that you’ve given a rundown of the article, it’s time to take a closer look. Think about what the author did well and what could have been done better.

Check out the proof they used and if it seems solid. Give a thorough assessment, and use examples from the text to support your thoughts.

For Example

“While the article presents compelling evidence linking social media usage to mental health issues , it is important to acknowledge some limitations in Smith’s study.

The sample size of the research was relatively small. It comprises only 100 participants, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.

Additionally, the study primarily focused on one specific age group, namely adolescents. This way, there’s room for further research on other demographic groups.”

Step 6: Express Your Perspective

Here’s your chance to give your two cents and show off your smarts. Put your spin on the article by pointing out the pros, cons, and other potential improvements. Remember to back up your thoughts with facts and sound arguments.

Continuing with the Previous Example

Despite the limitations, Smith’s research offers valuable insights into the complex relationship between social media and mental health.

Future studies could expand the sample size and include a more diverse range of age groups. It is better to understand the broader impact of social media on mental well-being.

Furthermore, exploring strategies for developing digital literacy programs could be potential avenues for future research.

Step 7: Conclusion and Final Thoughts

At the end of your article review, wrap it up with a brief and powerful conclusion. Give a summary of your main points and overall thoughts about the article.

Point out its importance to the field and the impact of the study. Finish off with a thought-provoking conclusion. Give the reader a sense of finality and emphasize the need for additional research or discussion.

For instance

“In conclusion, John Smith’s article provides valuable insights into the detrimental effects of excessive social media usage on adolescent mental health.

While the research has limitations, it serves as a starting point for further investigation in this rapidly evolving field.

By addressing the research gaps and implementing targeted interventions:

We can strive to promote a healthier relationship between social media and mental well-being in our digitally connected society.”

Step 8: Editing and Proofreading

Before submission, set aside some time for editing and proofreading.

Ensure everything makes sense and everything is correct. Check out how it reads and if your points come across clearly. Get feedback from other people to get a different point of view and make it even better.

Types of Article Reviews

In college, you might be asked to write different types of review articles, including:

Narrative Review

This type of review needs you to look into the author’s background and experiences. You have to go through the specialist’s theories and practices and compare them. For the success of a narrative review, ensure that your arguments are qualitative and make sense.

Evidence Review

For a solid evidence paper, you got to put in the work and study the topic. You’ll need to research the facts, analyze the author’s ideas, their effects, and more.

Systematic Review

This task involves reviewing a bunch of research papers and summarizing the existing knowledge about a certain subject. A systematic paper type uses an organized approach and expects you to answer questions linked to the research.

Tips for Writing a Great Article Review

Here are some expert tips you could use to write an exceptional article review:

1. Figure out the main points you want to cover and why they matter.

It will help you zero in on the key points.

2. Look for and assess pertinent sources, both from the past and present.

It will give you a better understanding of the article you’re looking at.

3. Come Up with a Catchy Title, Summarize Your Topic in an Abstract, and Select Keywords

It will help people read your review and get a good idea of what it’s about.

4. Write the main point of a review along with introducing the topic.

It should help readers get a better grasp of the topic.

Outline for Writing a Good Article Review

Here’s an outline to write an excellent article review.

Introduction

– Begin with a summary of the article

– Put in background knowledge of the topic

– State why you are writing the review

– Give an overview of the article’s main points

– Figure out why the author choose to write something

– Look at the article and consider what it does well and what it could have done better.

– Highlight the shortcomings in the article

– Restate why you are writing the review

– Sum up the main points in a few sentences

– Suggest what could be achieved in the future research

Review Article Example

Title: “The Power of Vulnerability: A Review of Brené Brown’s Daring Greatly”

Introduction:

In her revolutionary book “Daring Greatly,”

Brené Brown, a renowned researcher and storyteller. Delves into vulnerability and how it can positively impact our lives, both professionally and personally.

Brown’s work has gained lots of praise. Since it resonates with people looking to build real connections in a world that often feels isolated.

This article looks to recap the main ideas and concepts from “Daring Greatly.” Also explains why it is such a captivating and insightful read.

Summary of Key Ideas:

“Daring Greatly” is all about how the vulnerability isn’t a sign of being weak. but it’s actually what it takes to be brave, strong and live a full life.

Brene Brown examines how society and culture can make it hard to be vulnerable. And, how fear of being judged or shamed stops us from being our authentic selves.

The book puts a lot of emphasis on shame and how it affects us.

Brown explains that shame thrives when it’s kept hidden away and can only be cured by being open, understanding, and compassionate.

By admitting our weaknesses, we can create meaningful connections and a sense of community.

Brown looks into the connection between being open to vulnerability and unleashing creative leadership and innovation.

She uses her own experiences and research to support her viewpoint. The book also gives useful advice on how to include vulnerability in different parts of life. Such as relationships, parenting, and the workplace.

Strengths of the Book:

Brown’s book is remarkable for her ability to mix her own experiences with comprehensive research. Combining her stories and evidence makes the material engaging and easy to understand.

Plus, her writing style is so friendly that readers feel they’re being acknowledged and accepted.

There’s advice on how to be kind to yourself. Set your limits, and accept that things won’t always be perfect. It’s like a toolkit to help you build strength and make positive changes.

Final Verdict

This book is really helpful for everyone, no matter who you are. It can help you figure out how to grow in life, have better relationships, and become a better leader. Plus, since it applies to all kinds of people, everyone can get something out of it.

If you want to write a great article review, it’s important to pick the right article, understand and analyze it critically. Finally, express your thoughts on it clearly. Ensure to stay impartial, back up your points with evidence, and write clearly and coherently.

Still if you are having troubles writing an article review, don’t hesitate to count on the expertise of our writers .

Order Original Papers & Essays

Your First Custom Paper Sample is on Us!

Timely Deliveries

No Plagiarism & AI

100% Refund

Calculate Your Order Price

Related blogs.

Connections with Writers and support

Privacy and Confidentiality Guarantee

Average Quality Score

How to Write an Article Review: Tips, Outline, Format

Have you been assigned an article review paper, but you are unsure where to start, or what is a review article at all? There is no need to worry, as EssayService has put together a top guide for you! Find out all about an article review to master your assignment.

What is an Article Review?

In simple terms, an article review essay is like a summary and evaluation of another professional or expert's work. It may also be referred to as a literature review that includes an outline of the most recent research on the subject, or a critical review that focuses on a specific article with smaller scope. Article review can be used for many reasons; for example, a teacher or lecturer may wish to introduce their students to a new subject by reviewing a professional's piece. You can also learn about the most important works of specialists in your industry by looking at relevant article review examples.

Also, a newspaper article review example could be a journalist writing a critique about another competitor's published work.

In comparison, a book review article example could be critiqued by a fellow author or even a student in the chosen field.

Depending on the critique criteria and the work being reviewed, there could also be certain points asked for addition which should be checked and noted by the lecturer or supervisor. Otherwise, follow the article review guidelines from our write my essay service to complete the assignment in no time.

Key points when writing an article review:

Use the article review template from our paper writing service to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

How to Start an Article Review?

Firstly read the work being reviewed as much as possible and look up key phrases and words that are not understood.
Discuss the work with other professionals or colleagues to collect more opinions and get a more balanced impression.
Highlight important sections or sentences and refer this to your knowledge in the topic, do you agree or disagree and what does this contribute to the field?
Then re-write the key arguments and findings into your own words this will help gain better understanding into the paper. This can be just written as an outline also and will help decide which points are wanted to discuss later.

If you feel you do not have enough time to create a critique worthy of your time, then come to EssayService and order a custom Article review online.

You can order essay independent of type, for example:

nursing essay;
law essay writing;
history essays.

The best way to write an effective essay would be to draw up a plan or outline of what needs to be covered and use it for guidance throughout the critique.

Article Review Formatting

There is no one-fits-all article format you can follow in your review. In fact, the formatting is dictated by the citation style specified by your professor in the task requirements. Thus, be sure to clarify the preferred style before you jump straight to writing to handle the given assignment right.

APA Format Article Review

Writing an APA style article review, you will most likely use articles from journals, websites, and newspapers. For each source, you will have to create properly formatted bibliographical entries.

Here is how to write an article review APA:

Journal: Author’s last name, First and middle initial. (Year of Publication). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
Website: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
Newspaper: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

MLA Format Article Review

Tips for citing sources in an article review MLA format:

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

Article Review Outline

Planning out an outline for your paper will help writing and to put it together so therefore saving you time in the long run.

Some questions to help with the outline of a critique:

What does the article set out to do or prove?
Are the main ideas clear and defined?
How substantial is the evidence?
Where does the article fit in its specific field?
Does it provide new knowledge on the topic?
What are the central theories and assumptions?
Is the writer conclusive at getting their point across?

Here is a typical article review format to follow:

Use our article review template to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

Article Review Title

Firstly start with creating a title for your critique, this should be something to do with the focus of the work that is being reviewed. An approach could be to make it descriptive or also in a more creative way think of something that intrigues the reader. After the title, this is a good place to correctly cite the paper being critiqued and include the important details for example, the author, title of publication, any page references. The style in which the citation is written will depend on which is best for this type of work being reviewed.

Article Review Introduction

The introduction should be a brief glimpse into what the author was writing about and any other details the audience will find interesting. Maybe some background details on the piece that is not already known or something that contributes to the review itself. It is a good idea to start by introducing the work at the start of the paragraph and then include a ' hook '. Include the writer's thesis if there is one and put it at the end but include your own thesis towards the critique near the beginning of this section.

Article Review Body

When constructing the summary section, write down the important points and findings in the piece in your own words. Include how the claims are supported and backed up with evidence but use direct quotes as sparing as possible. Do not put in any information known to professionals in the field or topic, but detail any conclusions the work came to. Make sure the paper is not just copied word for word and is actually summarized by yourself; this will also help the review stage.

To make an accurate critique, break down the work and express opinions on whether it achieves its goals and how useful it is in explaining the topics for an article review. Decide if the paper contributes to its field and is important and credible to the given field. Back up all the claims with evidence from the summary or another source. If using another text, remember to cite it correctly in the bibliography section. Look at how strong the points are and do they contribute to the argument. Try to identify any biases the writer might have and use this to make a fair critique. This part is only for opinions of the piece's significance, not including whether you liked it. Furthermore, the different types of audiences that would benefit from the paper can be mentioned in this section.

Article Review Conclusion

In the conclusion section of the critique, there should only be one or two paragraphs in which a summary of key points and opinions in the piece are included. Also, summarize the paper's significance to its field and how accurate the work is. Depending on the type of critique or work evaluated, it is also possible to include comments on future research or the topic to be discussed further.

If other sources have been used, construct a bibliography section and correctly cite all works utilized in the critique.

The APA format is very common in an article review and stands for American Psychology Association. This will include a 'references list' at the end of the critique and in-text citations, mentioning the author's last name, page number, and publication date.

There are also MLA and Chicago formats for citations with slight differences in a name, like using a 'works cited' page for MLA. More can be found in this guide on the subtle differences between the types of citation methods under the heading 'Creating a bibliography.'

Article Review Example

Article review writing tips.

If you are interested in best scholarships for high school seniors , the following tips will be handy while writing your essay or article:

Allow enough time to complete the research and writing of the critique. The number one problem with creating a critique is running out of time to make it the best it can be. This can be avoided by effective planning and keeping on time with the deadlines you set out.
Collect twice more research than you think is needed to write a review. This will help when coming to the writing stage as not all the information collected will be used in the final draft.
Write in a style that is compatible with the work being critiqued. This will be better for whoever requested the critique and also will make paper easier to construct.
A summary and evaluation must be written. Do not leave out either part as one complements the other and is vital to create a critique worth reading.
Be clear and explain well every statement made about the piece . Everything that is unknown to professionals in the field should be explained and all comments should be easy to follow for the reader.
Do not just describe the work, analyze and interpret it. The critique should be in depth and give the audience some detailed interpretations of the work in a professional way.
Give an assessment of the quality in the writing and of what standard it is. Evaluate every aspect in the paper so that the audience can see where it fits into the rest of the related works. Give opinions based on fact and do not leave any comments without reason as this will not count for anything.

How to Write an Article Review?

Writing a review article is not that hard if you know what steps to take. Below is a step-by-step guide on how to write a review example quickly and easily.

Before You Start

Before you start writing your review essay, there are a few pre-writing steps to take. The pre-writing process should consist of the following steps:

Pick the subject of your review (if it wasn’t specified by your professor);
Read the article fully multiple times;
Summarize the main ideas, points, and claims made in the article;
Define the positive (strong) aspects;
Identify the gaps or inconsistencies;
Find the questions that remained unanswered.

All these steps are needed to help you define the direction for your review article and find the main ideas you’d like to cover in it.

After you review articles and define the key ideas, gaps, and other details, map out your future paper by creating a detailed outline.

Here are the core elements that must be included:

Pre-title page;
Corresponding author details (optional);
Running head (only for the APA style);
Summary page (optional);
Title page;
Introduction;
References/Works Cited;
Suggested Reading page (optional);
Tables and Figure Legends (if required by the professor).

This step is vital to organize your thoughts and ensure a proper structure of your work. Thus, be sure not to skip this step.

When you have an outline, students can move on to the writing stage by formulating compelling titles for their article reviews. Titles should be declarative, interrogative, or descriptive to reflect the core focus of the paper.

Article Citation

After the title should follow a proper citation of the piece you are going to review. Write a citation according to the required style, and feel free to check out a well-written article review example to see how it should look like.

Article Identification

Start the first paragraph of your review with concise and clear article identification that specifies its title, author, name of the resource (e.g., journal, web, etc.), and the year of publication.

Following the identification, write a short introductory paragraph. It should be to the point and state a clear thesis for your review.

Summary and Critique

In the main body of your article review, you should first make a detailed but not too extensive summary of the article you reviewed, its main ideas, statements, and findings. In this part, you should also reflect on the conclusion made by the author of the original article.

After a general summary should follow an objective critique. In this part of your paper, you have to state and analyze the main strengths and weaknesses of the article. Also, you need to point out any gaps or unanswered questions that are still there. And clarify your stance on the author’s assertions.

Lastly, you need to craft a compelling conclusion that recaps the key points of your review and gives the final, logical evaluation of the piece that was reviewed.

After this, proofread your work and submit it.

No Time Left For Your Due Assignment

Now we hope you understand how to write a review of an article. However, we know that writing a great article review requires a lot of time to properly research the work. To save your precious time, visit EssayService, where our team of top essay writers will help you. The team can even provide you with the best article review topics! You can learn more at the college essay writing service page where we have free guides with all the essay writing tips and tricks!

Frequently asked questions

She was flawless! first time using a website like this, I've ordered article review and i totally adored it! grammar punctuation, content - everything was on point

This writer is my go to, because whenever I need someone who I can trust my task to - I hire Joy. She wrote almost every paper for me for the last 2 years

Term paper done up to a highest standard, no revisions, perfect communication. 10s across the board!!!!!!!

I send him instructions and that's it. my paper was done 10 hours later, no stupid questions, he nailed it.

Sometimes I wonder if Michael is secretly a professor because he literally knows everything. HE DID SO WELL THAT MY PROF SHOWED MY PAPER AS AN EXAMPLE. unbelievable, many thanks

New Posts to Your Inbox!

Stay in touch

All eBooks & Audiobooks
Academic eBook Collection
Home Grown eBook Collection
Off-Campus Access
Literature Resource Center
Opposing Viewpoints
ProQuest Central
Course Guides
Citing Sources
Library Research
Websites by Topic
Book-a-Librarian
Research Tutorials
Use the Catalog
Use Databases
Use Films on Demand
Use Home Grown eBooks
Use NC LIVE
Evaluating Sources
Primary vs. Secondary
Scholarly vs. Popular
Make an Appointment
Writing Tools
Annotated Bibliographies
Summaries, Reviews & Critiques
Writing Center

Service Alert

Article Summaries, Reviews & Critiques

Writing an article SUMMARY

Writing an article REVIEW

Writing an article CRITIQUE
Citing Sources This link opens in a new window
About RCC Library

Text: 336-308-8801

Email: [email protected]

Call: 336-633-0204

Schedule: Book-a-Librarian

Like us on Facebook

Links on this guide may go to external web sites not connected with Randolph Community College. Their inclusion is not an endorsement by Randolph Community College and the College is not responsible for the accuracy of their content or the security of their site.

A journal article review is written for a reader who is knowledgeable in the discipline and is interested not just in the coverage and content of the article being reviewed, but also in your critical assessment of the ideas and argument that are being presented by the author.

Your review might be guided by the following questions:

Additional Resources

All links open in a new window.

How to Write an Article Review (from Essaypro.com)

How to Review a Journal Article (from University of Illinois Springfield)

Writing Critical Reviews (from Queen's University Library)

<< Previous: Writing an article SUMMARY
Next: Writing an article CRITIQUE >>
Last Updated: Mar 15, 2024 9:32 AM
URL: https://libguides.randolph.edu/summaries

How to Write an Article Review: Examples and Tips

In today's information-rich world, mastering the skill of discerning valuable insights from the overwhelming noise is a game-changer. Whether you're a student striving for success or a professional aiming to stay sharp, knowing how to critique an article is your key.

Our custom article review service explains the intricacies of writing an article review, categorizes different types and shares insights into impactful formatting. It's not just theory – we'll guide you step by step, from pre-writing to a tangible review article example, and refine your abilities with essential proofreading tips.

What Is an Article Review

An article review is more than a mere summary; it is a thoughtful analysis and critique that goes beyond the surface of the title. It's an intellectual exercise that challenges you to engage deeply with the author's ideas, question their methodology, and evaluate the significance of their findings.

Consider it as a journey through the landscape of someone else's thoughts. It's not just about where the writer takes you; it's about the path they choose, the landmarks they highlight, and the potential detours they overlook. An effective examination is a conversation with the author, a dialogue where you appreciate their insights, challenge assumptions, and perhaps even find alternative routes through the intellectual terrain they've explored.

As you start to understand how to review the article, encourage thought by asking questions.

What assumptions underlie the author's arguments?
Are there alternative perspectives that could enrich the discussion?
How does the author's methodology shape their conclusions, and are there potential biases to consider?
How does the title contribute to the clarity and coherence of the author's arguments?
In what ways does the title influence the reader's perception of the author's

At EssayHub, our book review writing service experts believe an article review is an opportunity not just to absorb information but to actively engage with it, to question, to ponder, and to contribute your own insights to the scholarly conversation.

Types of Review

When tackling article reviews, there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach; it's a task that allows for versatile strategies. Think of understanding the different types of reviews as having a multifaceted toolkit ready for use. In this part, we'll guide you through the varied types of a review article, each showing a unique viewpoint and serving a specific purpose. Whether you're analyzing a scholarly piece on your own or asking someone to 'write an article review for me,' you'll get valuable insights.

Journal Article Review

A journal article review involves critically evaluating and analyzing scholarly pieces published in an academic journal. It requires a thorough understanding of the author's research, methodology, results, and conclusions. The reviewer assesses the journal's contributions to the field, its theoretical framework, and the validity of the research methods employed. The goal is to provide a comprehensive summary and critique that highlights both the strengths and limitations of the piece.

Research Article Review

A research article review focuses on the evaluation of a scientific or academic research paper. This type of examination involves examining the research question, experimental design, data collection methods, statistical analysis, and the interpretation of findings. The reviewer assesses the reliability and validity of the research, considers the implications of the study, and offers insights into its potential impact on the broader academic community.

Science Article Review

A science article review encompasses a critical analysis of a piece in the field of science, covering disciplines such as physics, chemistry, biology, or any other scientific domain. This review type involves assessing the clarity of scientific concepts presented, the validity of experimental procedures, and the significance of the study's findings. According to our literature review writing service , reviewers may also consider the article's potential contributions to advancing scientific knowledge and its relevance to current scientific debates or issues.

Article Review Format

Ensuring the proper formatting of an article examination is crucial, and it should consistently align with the citation style specified by your instructor. If you're uncertain, don't hesitate to ask us - write my article review for me, along with additional guidelines to effectively structure your piece.

Meanwhile, here are some questions to consider:

What citation style (MLA, APA, ASA, Chicago, etc.) should you employ?
What is the recommended length for your article review?
Should your assignment encompass a summary, critique, or include personal opinions?
Is it necessary to highlight a theme or central idea from the articles?
Does your instructor expect background information to be incorporated?

APA Format Article Review

An APA review sticks to the rules of the American Psychological Association. When unsure how to write an article review in APA format, remember that it carefully cites the article, using a title page, intro, summary, critique, conclusion, and references. Citations follow the author-date format, focusing on being clear and objective. The review digs into the article's methods, results, and overall impact.

When you write an article review in APA, your in-text citation might read: (Anderson & Ramirez, 2019)

The corresponding entry in the reference list would be: Anderson, L., & Ramirez, C. (2019). Unveiling the Dynamics of Urban Green Spaces. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 112-128.

MLA Format Article Review

For an MLA writing review, it follows the Modern Language Association's style. It's important to know how sources are cited in the text and in the Works Cited page. The structure usually has an intro, summary, critique, and conclusion. MLA citations often have the author's last name and page number in brackets in the text. This review might highlight the document's literary or humanities aspects, such as style, language, and cultural context.

In an MLA format publication, the citation within the text could look like: (Anderson and Ramirez 112)

The Works Cited entry for this publication: Anderson, Laura, and Carlos Ramirez. 'Exploring the Impact of Urban Green Spaces on Well-being.' Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 25, no. 3, 2019, pp. 112-128.

Review Article Outline

As you read your writing piece, organize your thoughts into sections in an outline. Note down key facts, contributions, and any contradictions. Identify strengths and weaknesses, and start mapping your outline.

If your professor doesn't want a summary or personal critique, skip those parts. Like other assignments, your examination needs an introduction, body, and conclusion. Consider dividing your outline accordingly, with subheadings in the body. If you need help starting, find a sample outline.

Your article assessment should have the following:

Pre-Title Page: Essential details like publication type, publication title, author names with affiliations, and corresponding author info.
Running Head (APA format): A concise title for consistent formatting.
Summary Page (optional but useful): Summarize the document in 800 words, covering background, purpose, results, and methodology.
Title Page: Full title, a 250-word abstract, and 4-6 keywords for discoverability.
Introduction: Engage your reader with an overview.
Body: Organize your analysis with headings and subheadings.
Works Cited/References: Properly cite all sources.
Optional Suggested Reading Page: If allowed, suggest further readings.
Tables and Figure Legends (if instructed): Include visuals when requested for clarity.

Writing an Article Review in 7 Steps

Now, let's move on to understanding how to write a review paper covering everything from creating the title to summarizing key points. This step-by-step guide breaks it down into seven simple steps, making the entire process more manageable.

Step 1: Create the Title

The very first question you might have is how to start an article review. It's crucial to develop a title that not only captures the essence of the publication but also reflects your perspective. For instance, consider the title: ' Decoding Data: A Critical Exploration of Privacy Concerns in Online Health Platforms. ' This title not only introduces the main theme but also hints at the critical evaluation that will unfold in the writing. It sets the tone for your analysis and sparks interest from the outset.

Step 2: Reference the Article

In the second step, it's essential to ensure accurate citation by providing specific details. Take a look at this example:

Author: Rodriguez, M., & Chen, L.
Title: 'Privacy Matters: Analyzing the Impact of Health Apps on User Data'
Publication Date: 2023
Source: Journal of Digital Ethics, 8(2), 87-105.

By including these details, you not only acknowledge the authors and the publication but also provide your readers with the necessary information to locate and verify the article. This step lays the foundation for a credible and well-referenced examination.

Step 3: Article Identification

Identify key elements of the publication, such as the writer's main argument, methodology, and key findings. Pinpoint any theoretical frameworks or models used in the title.

For example: The writing by Garcia and Kim examines the correlation between social media usage and mental health outcomes among adolescents. The authors employ a longitudinal study approach, utilizing surveys and interviews to gather data.

Step 4: Make an Introduction

In your introduction, provide a brief overview of the title's subject and purpose. Capture the reader's attention and clearly state your thesis or main point related to the title. For instance, you might start your article review template like this.

In the digital age, the impact of social media on mental health has become a topic of increasing concern. Garcia and Kim's recent study delves into this issue, aiming to uncover the nuanced relationship between social media engagement and the psychological well-being of adolescents. This writing piece critically analyzes the methodology, findings, and implications of their research.

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Summarize the main points of your assessment, highlighting key arguments, evidence, and results. Offer a concise overview without adding personal opinions.

Example: Garcia and Kim's study reveals a significant positive association between increased social media use and heightened levels of anxiety and depression among the adolescent population. The longitudinal study tracked participants over a two-year period, employing both quantitative and qualitative measures to assess mental health outcomes.

Step 6: Provide Critique

Critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of the writing. Well, how to critique an article , you might wonder. Discuss aspects such as methodology, data interpretation, and potential biases.

Example: While the study offers valuable insights, the reliance on self-reported data may introduce response bias. Additionally, the research predominantly focuses on mainstream social media platforms, potentially overlooking the impact of emerging platforms. Despite these limitations, the study's comprehensive approach contributes to the ongoing discourse surrounding the intersection of social media and mental health.

Step 7: Conclude

In the conclusion, summarize your overall assessment of the article and restate your main points. Offer insights into the broader implications of the research and suggest areas for future exploration.

For example: To conclude, Garcia and Kim's study sheds light on the complex relationship between social media use and adolescent mental health. Despite certain methodological limitations, the research underscores the need for continued investigation in this field. As we navigate the digital landscape, understanding these dynamics becomes crucial for devising effective interventions and support systems for the well-being of our youth.

Example of an Article Review

Why are we taking the time to discuss article review examples in this article? It might not be immediately apparent, but exploring a well-crafted article review sample is a vital step in the writing process for the following reasons:

Introduction to Key Works: Helps you to familiarize yourself with the important works of experts in your field.
Identification of Key Figures: You can recognize key figures contributing to a specific scientific field.
Understanding Field Advancements: Helps you define significant discoveries and advances made in your area of study.
Identification of Knowledge Gaps: You can uncover major gaps in existing knowledge, contributing to the formulation of fresh solutions.
Reference and Argumentation Resources: You discover solid references and arguments that can enhance your own writing.
Idea Generation: Helps you generate ideas for potential future research directions.
Becoming an Expert: Assists in gaining a deeper understanding of the subject area, moving towards expertise.
Writing Guidance: You acquire a clear idea of how to craft a well-structured review.

Can Anyone Write an Article Review for Me?

Is writing a review article worth it, how to write an apa format article review, how do you write an article review from the beginning, what is the proper article review format.

Plagiarism Report
Unlimited Revisions
24/7 Support

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
Qualitative versus quantitative research
Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base

Methodology

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

Search for relevant literature
Evaluate sources
Identify themes, debates, and gaps
Outline the structure
Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

Quick Run-through
Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

Your university’s library catalogue
Google Scholar
Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
EconLit (economics)
Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

What question or problem is the author addressing?
What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
What are the key theories, models, and methods?
Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
What are the results and conclusions of the study?
How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing - try for free!

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Try for free

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

Most research has focused on young women.
There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Sampling methods
Simple random sampling
Stratified sampling
Cluster sampling
Likert scales
Reproducibility

Statistics

Null hypothesis
Statistical power
Probability distribution
Effect size
Poisson distribution

Research bias

Optimism bias
Cognitive bias
Implicit bias
Hawthorne effect
Anchoring bias
Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An annotated bibliography is a list of source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a paper .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved March 25, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

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
Noro Psikiyatr Ars
v.59(1); 2022

Basics of Writing Review Articles

Almıla erol.

Adjunct Faculty, Psychiatry & Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

Evidence-based medicine forms the essence of medical practice in the modern world. No wonder review articles are the mainstay for evidence-based medicine.

Review articles provide a critical summary of the existing literature to explain the current state of scientific evidence on a particular topic. A well-written review article must summarize key research findings, reference must-read articles, describe current areas of agreement as well as controversies and debates, point out gaps in current knowledge, depict unanswered questions, and suggest directions for future research ( 1 ).

During the last decades, there has been a great expansion in the range of review methodologies resulting in many new review types ( 2 , 3 ). In an attempt to classify review types, Sutton et al. defined 48 different review types which they categorized into seven review families: traditional reviews, systematic reviews, review of reviews, rapid reviews, qualitative reviews, mixed method reviews and purpose specific reviews (for the full list of review types please see Sutton et al.) ( 2 ). To date, traditional reviews and systematic reviews have been most widely used in the field of medicine.

Traditional reviews usually cover advances in different aspects of a chosen topic and provide assessment of the subject within a broad spectrum. No formal guidance exists for traditional reviews. However, they have become increasingly more comprehensive and systematic since the emergence of systematic reviews. Narrative review, narrative summary, critical review, integrative review, and state of the art review are examples of traditional reviews ( 2 ).

Systematic reviews adopt a specific aim and a well-defined, rigorous methodology to enlighten a particular question. They usually focus on specific study types such as randomized controlled studies, observational studies, etc. They have well-defined reporting standards and guidance. Systematic reviews provide the highest level of evidence in medical sciences, playing an important role in the development of clinical guidelines ( 4 ). Meta-analysis is the most popular example of quantitative systematic review types.

Review articles summarize the current state of evidence on a particular topic
Review articles translate the relevance of evidence for readers
Independent of the review type, all reviews must have a predefined methodology
The methods utilized for the review should be explained clearly in the review paper
Review papers should be written in a structured format

Considering the overwhelming number of diverse review types, the initial burden authors face is to choose the review type that matches their purpose best. Despite the continuous rise in the number of review types, there are sources that provide guidance about this issue ( 5 ). Authors are highly recommended to examine and learn about different review methodologies before they decide on their review approach.

International guidelines such as PRISMA ( 6 ), Cochrane ( 7 ), and JBI ( 8 ) provide detailed information about how to conduct reviews starting from the planning and protocol writing phases. The purpose of these international guidelines is to ensure transparent, unbiased, and complete reporting. Although the guidelines are focused on systematic reviews, they can also be used as bases for conducting other types of reviews. PRISMA encourages journal editors and reviewers to use the guideline for evaluation of review papers. PRISMA checklist is available online in different languages including Turkish at www.prisma-statement.org ( 9 ).

No matter what type of review is undertaken, the key points in a review article are to have a predefined methodology which is clearly explained in the text, and to have a structured format. Just like research papers, the most common and convenient practice is to write review papers in “introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRaD)” format accompanied by title, abstract, key words, and references.

The title makes the first introductory and is the most important sentence of the review paper. Like research paper titles, it must be brief, informative, and interesting all at the same time. It must contain the key words or their derivatives to increase the discoverability of the article via search engines. In addition, the type of the review should be accurately stated in the title.

The aim of the introduction is to explain why the review is undertaken and to persuade the readers for its necessity. In the introduction section, the authors must mention the latest developments about the subject of concern and explain why a review is needed. It is a good practice to refer to previous review papers on the subject and state what makes the current review different than the previous ones.

The methods section of the review paper should be written detailed enough to prove its adequacy and make it possible to be reconducted including more recent papers in the future. Explicit scientific methods are required for systematic reviews as defined by international guidelines ( 7 – 9 ). Although no guidelines exist for traditional narrative reviews, they too should have a rational methodology explained clearly. The methods section of every review article should state the key words used for the search, data bases screened, and the time frame chosen for the literature search. It should also explain the inclusion and exclusion criteria used for the selection of papers.

The results section should include a flow chart which shows the number of identified, included, and excluded papers along with the reasons for exclusion, as described in PRISMA flow diagram guidelines ( 9 ). Results section should cite and present characteristics and outcomes of each one of the included studies, providing the necessary information to assess their quality, validity, and contribution. The most relevant information about the included articles should be depicted in literature summary tables. They are an essential part of the review article as they provide information at one glance and make the paper more readable. Literature summary tables must contain information about methods, frameworks, strengths, limitations, and conceptual contribution of each article ( 10 ). Oversized tables must be presented as supplementary files.

Discussion section provides a general interpretation of the results and presents expert opinion. Writing a review article is not only about extracting relevant previous work and analyzing them, but also about making synthesis and drawing conclusions. Therefore, providing an objective interpretation of the results and guiding readers for better understanding of the current evidence should form the central part of the discussion. Wherever there is not enough evidence to make objective conclusions, the lack of evidence should be stated instead. Limitations, biases and gaps of the included literature should be discussed along with the limitations of the review process itself. It is critical to discuss the potential impacts of the results for future research and clinical practice.

In conclusion, reviews are objective attempts to examine the current state of evidence on a particular topic and its impacts. A review paper should explain why the review is undertaken, describe the methodology used, introduce the articles included, and provide expert opinion on the evidence achieved in a structured format. High quality reviews are essential in guiding clinical practice and future research along with policy making.

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.

Review Paper Format: How To Write A Review Article Fast

This guide aims to demystify the review paper format, presenting practical tips to help you accelerate the writing process.

From understanding the structure to synthesising literature effectively, we’ll explore how to create a compelling review article swiftly, ensuring your work is both impactful and timely.

Whether you’re a seasoned researcher or a budding scholar, these insights will streamline your writing journey.

Research Paper, Review Paper Format

What is a review paper.

Diving into the realm of scholarly communication, you might have stumbled upon a research review article.

This unique genre serves to synthesise existing data, offering a panoramic view of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.

Unlike a standard research article that presents original experiments, a review paper delves into published literature, aiming to:

clarify, and
evaluate previous findings.

Imagine you’re tasked to write a review article. The starting point is often a burning research question. Your mission? To scour various journals, piecing together a well-structured narrative that not only summarises key findings but also identifies gaps in existing literature.

This is where the magic of review writing shines – it’s about creating a roadmap for future research, highlighting areas ripe for exploration.

Review articles come in different flavours, with systematic reviews and meta-analyses being the gold standards. The methodology here is meticulous, with a clear protocol for selecting and evaluating studies.

This rigorous approach ensures that your review is more than just an overview; it’s a critical analysis that adds depth to the understanding of the subject.

Crafting a good review requires mastering the art of citation. Every claim or observation you make needs to be backed by relevant literature. This not only lends credibility to your work but also provides a treasure trove of information for readers eager to delve deeper.

Types Of Review Paper

Not all review articles are created equal. Each type has its methodology, purpose, and format, catering to different research needs and questions.

Systematic Review Paper

First up is the systematic review, the crème de la crème of review types. It’s known for its rigorous methodology, involving a detailed plan for:

identifying,
selecting, and
critically appraising relevant research.

The aim? To answer a specific research question. Systematic reviews often include meta-analyses, where data from multiple studies are statistically combined to provide more robust conclusions. This review type is a cornerstone in evidence-based fields like healthcare.

Literature Review Paper

Then there’s the literature review, a broader type you might encounter.

Here, the goal is to give an overview of the main points and debates on a topic, without the stringent methodological framework of a systematic review.

Literature reviews are great for getting a grasp of the field and identifying where future research might head. Often reading literature review papers can help you to learn about a topic rather quickly.

Narrative Reviews

Narrative reviews allow for a more flexible approach. Authors of narrative reviews draw on existing literature to provide insights or critique a certain area of research.

This is generally done with a less formal structure than systematic reviews. This type is particularly useful for areas where it’s difficult to quantify findings across studies.

Scoping Reviews

Scoping reviews are gaining traction for their ability to map out the existing literature on a broad topic, identifying:

key concepts,
theories, and

Unlike systematic reviews, scoping reviews have a more exploratory approach, which can be particularly useful in emerging fields or for topics that haven’t been comprehensively reviewed before.

Each type of review serves a unique purpose and requires a specific skill set. Whether you’re looking to summarise existing findings, synthesise data for evidence-based practice, or explore new research territories, there’s a review type that fits the bill.

Knowing how to write, read, and interpret these reviews can significantly enhance your understanding of any research area.

What Are The Parts In A Review Paper

A review paper has a pretty set structure, with minor changes here and there to suit the topic covered. The format not only organises your thoughts but also guides your readers through the complexities of your topic.

Title & Abstract

Starting with the title and abstract, you set the stage. The title should be a concise indicator of the content, making it easier for others to quickly tell what your article content is about.

As for the abstract, it should act as a descriptive summary, offering a snapshot of your review’s scope and findings.

Introduction

The introduction lays the groundwork, presenting the research question that drives your review. It’s here you:

justify the importance of your review,
delineating the current state of knowledge and
highlighting gaps.

This section aims to articulate the significance of the topic and your objective in exploring it.

Methodology

The methodology section is the backbone of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, detailing the research methods employed to select, assess, and synthesise studies.

This transparency allows readers to gauge the rigour and reproducibility of your review. It’s a testament to the integrity of your work, showing how you’ve minimised bias.

The heart of your review lies in the body, where you:

analyse, and
critique existing literature.

This is where you synthesise evidence, draw connections, and present both sides of any argument. Well-structured paragraphs and clear subheadings guide readers through your analysis, offering insights and fostering a deeper understanding of the subject.

Discussion & Conclusion

The discussion or conclusion section is where you weave together the main points, reflecting on what your findings mean for the field.

It’s about connecting the dots, offering a synthesis of evidence that answers your initial research question. This part often hints at future research directions, suggesting areas that need further exploration due to gaps in existing knowledge.

Lastly, the citation list is your nod to the scholarly community, acknowledging the contributions of others. Each citation is a thread in the larger tapestry of academic discourse, enabling readers to delve deeper into the research that has shaped your review.

Tips To Write An Review Article Fast

Writing a review article quickly without sacrificing quality might seem like a tall order, but with the right approach, it’s entirely achievable.

Clearly Define Your Research Question

Clearly define your research question. A focused question not only narrows down the scope of your literature search but also keeps your review concise and on track.

By honing in on a specific aspect of a broader topic, you can avoid the common pitfall of becoming overwhelmed by the vast expanse of available literature. This specificity allows you to zero in on the most relevant studies, making your review more impactful.

Efficient Literature Searching

Utilise databases specific to your field and employ advanced search techniques like Boolean operators. This can drastically reduce the time you spend sifting through irrelevant articles.

Additionally, leveraging citation chains—looking at who has cited a pivotal paper in your area and who it cites—can uncover valuable sources you might otherwise miss.

Organise Your Findings Systematically

Developing a robust organisation strategy is key. As you gather sources, categorize them based on themes or methodologies. This not only aids in structuring your review but also in identifying areas where research is lacking or abundant.

Tools like citation management software can be invaluable here, helping you keep track of your sources and their key points. We list out some of the best AI tools for academic research here.

Build An Outline Before Writing

Don’t underestimate the power of a well-structured outline. A clear blueprint of your article can guide your writing process, ensuring that each section flows logically into the next.

This roadmap not only speeds up the writing process by providing a clear direction but also helps maintain coherence, ensuring your review article delivers a compelling narrative that advances understanding in your field.

Start Writing With The Easiest Sections

When it’s time to write, start with sections you find easiest. This might be the methodology or a particular thematic section where you feel most confident.

Getting words on the page can build momentum, making it easier to tackle more challenging sections later.

Remember, your first draft doesn’t have to be perfect; the goal is to start articulating your synthesis of the literature.

Learn How To Write An Article Review

Mastering the review paper format is a crucial step towards efficient academic writing. By adhering to the structured components outlined, you can streamline the creation of a compelling review article.

Embracing these guidelines not only speeds up the writing process but also enhances the clarity and impact of your work, ensuring your contributions to scholarly discourse are both valuable and timely.

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!

Journal Article Review in APA Style

Journal article reviews refer to the appraisal of potencies and limitations of an article’s opinion and subject matter. The article reviews offer the readers with an explanation, investigation and clarification to evaluate the importance of the article. A journal article review usually follows the APA style, which is in itself an exceptional mode of writing. Writing a journal article review in APA style requires a thorough reading of an article and then present our personal opinions on its subject matter.

In order to write a journal article review in APA style, one must necessarily conform to the detailed guidelines of APA style of writing. As such, a few tips for writing a journal article review in APA style have been provided in details below.

Tips for Writing Journal Article Review in APA Style

Getting started.

Read the complete article. Most journal articles use highly complicated and difficult language and wording. Thus, it is suggested to read the article thoroughly several times to understand it perfectly. Select a statement that effectively conveys the main idea of your review. Present the ideas in a rational order, keeping in mind that all opinions must sustain the main idea.

Start with a header with citation

Journal article reviews start with a header, including citation of the sources being reviewed. This citation is mentioned at the top of the review, following the APA style (refer to the APA style manual for more information). We will need the author’s name for the article, title of the article, journal of the published article, volume and issue number, publication date, and page numbers for the article.

Write a summary

The introductory paragraph of the review should provide a brief summary of the article, strictly limiting it to one to three paragraphs depending on the article length. The summary should discuss only the most imperative details about the article, like the author’s intention in writing the article, how the study was conducted, how the article relates to other work on the same subject, the results and other relevant information from the article.

Body of the review

The succeeding paragraphs of the review should present your ideas and opinions on the article. Discuss the significance and suggestion of the results of the study. The body of the article review should be limited to one to two paragraphs, including your understanding of the article, quotations from the article demonstrating your main ideas, discussing the article’s limitations and how to overcome them.

Concluding the review

The concluding paragraphs of the review should provide your personal appraisal of the journal article. Discuss whether the article is well-written or not, whether any information is missing, or if further research is necessary on the subject. Also, write a paragraph on how the author could develop the study results, what the information means on a large scale, how further investigation can develop the subject matter, and how the knowledge of this field can be extended further.

Citation and Revision

In-text citation of direct quotes or paraphrases from the article can be done using the author’s name, year of publication and page numbers (refer to the APA-style manual for citation guidelines). After finishing the writing of journal article review in APA style, it would be advised to re-visit the review after a few days and then re-read it altogether. By doing this, you will be able to view the review with a new perspective and may detect mistakes that were previously left undetected.

The above mentioned tips will help and guide you for writing a journal article review in APA style. However, while writing a journal article review, remember that you are undertaking more than just a narrative review. Thus, the article review should not merely focus on discussing what the article is about, but should reveal your personal ideas and opinions on the article.

Seo content writing.

Search engine optimisation or SEO content writing is not just an application to be used for the website, but it can be used for various other benefits as well. In a broad sense, SEO tools can be used in many different ways in order to promote websites, businesses, and products and services. In fact, one […]

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

A fundamental requisite of a publication in any reputed journal is the need to provide readers with unbiased and unambiguous research. Toward this objective, a published article should disclose whether the author or authors had any competing interest or conflict of interest while preparing the article. Consequently, the onus is on the journal to publish […]

Capitalization Rules in MLA Style: Crafting Titles That Appeal

Mastering MLA Style: Crafting Captivating Titles with Proper Capitalization. Adhering to specific rules and guidelines is paramount when crafting titles in academic writing. In this blog, we will delve into the intricacies of capitalization rules in MLA style, shedding light on what words should and should not be capitalized. Let us explore the nuances of […]

How to write a good scientific review article

Affiliation.

1 The FEBS Journal Editorial Office, Cambridge, UK.
PMID: 35792782
DOI: 10.1111/febs.16565

Literature reviews are valuable resources for the scientific community. With research accelerating at an unprecedented speed in recent years and more and more original papers being published, review articles have become increasingly important as a means to keep up to date with developments in a particular area of research. 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. Thus, the importance of building review-writing into a scientific career cannot be overstated. In this instalment of The FEBS Journal's Words of Advice series, I provide detailed guidance on planning and writing an informative and engaging literature review.

Publication types

Open access
Published: 01 April 2024

Association of anthropometric measures with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in US adults: revisiting the obesity paradox

Shan Li 1 , 2 na1 ,
Zhiqing Fu 1 , 2 na1 &
Wei Zhang 2 , 3

BMC Public Health volume 24 , Article number: 929 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Previous studies have shown that the obesity paradox exists in a variety of clinical settings, whereby obese individuals have lower mortality than their normal-weight counterparts. It remains unclear whether the association between obesity and mortality risk varies by anthropometric measures. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between various anthropometric measures and all-cause and cause-specific mortality in US adults.

This cohort study included data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey between 2009 and 2018, with a sample size of 28,353 individuals weighted to represent 231 million US adults. Anthropometric measurements were obtained by trained technicians using standardized methods. Mortality data were collected from the date of enrollment through December 31, 2019. Weighted Cox proportional hazards models, restricted cubic spline curves, and cumulative incidence analyses were performed.

A total of 2091 all-cause deaths, 606 cardiovascular deaths, 519 cancer deaths, and 966 other-cause deaths occurred during a median follow-up of 5.9 years. The association between body mass index (BMI) and mortality risk was inversely J-shaped, whereas the association between waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) and mortality risk was positively J-shaped. There was a progressive increase in the association between the WHtR category and mortality risk. Compared with the reference category of WHtR < 0.5, the estimated hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was 1.004 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.001–1.006) for WHtR 0.50–0.59, 1.123 (95% CI 1.120–1.127) for WHtR 0.60–0.69, 1.591 (95% CI 1.584–1.598) for WHtR 0.70–0.79, and 2.214 (95% CI 2.200–2.228) for WHtR ≥ 0.8, respectively. Other anthropometric indices reflecting central obesity also showed that greater adiposity was associated with higher mortality.

Conclusions

Anthropometric measures reflecting central obesity were independently and positively associated with mortality risk, eliminating the possibility of an obesity paradox.

Graphical Abstract

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Obesity is a growing public health concern, with the global prevalence predicted to reach 14% in men and 20% in women by 2030 [ 1 ]. In the United States, the prevalence of obesity will be as high as 47% in both men and women by that time [ 1 ]. The etiology of obesity is multifactorial and includes biology, genetics, socioeconomics, environmental factors, and access to healthcare resources [ 2 ]. Strong evidence suggests that obesity has deleterious effects on glucolipid homeostasis, blood pressure, systemic inflammation, and oxidative stress, thereby increasing the risk of various pathophysiological conditions such as diabetes, atherosclerosis, hypertension, musculoskeletal disorders, and certain cancers, as well as predisposing to premature death [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ]. However, the existing literature reports that obese individuals have better survival than their normal-weight counterparts in a variety of clinical settings, a phenomenon known as the obesity-survival paradox [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]. This counterintuitive relationship may make it difficult to clarify the link between obesity and metabolic pathology and may send confusing messages to healthcare professionals and policymakers, potentially leading to hesitancy in controlling weight and adopting healthy lifestyles.

Several assessment tools have been used clinically to define excess body fat, including anthropometric, bioelectrical impedance analysis, densitometric and imaging-based methods [ 2 ]. Body mass index (BMI) is the most used anthropometric measure reflecting overall obesity. The obesity-survival paradox is typically documented using BMI as an evaluative indicator [ 8 , 10 , 11 ]. Epidemiological and genetic evidence suggests that the systemic metabolic risks of obesity depend not only on the amount of fat, but also on its distribution, and that central obesity, mainly the accumulation of abdominal or visceral fat, contributes to major cardiometabolic abnormalities and total mortality [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. However, BMI has inherent limitations in defining adiposity because it can differentiate neither body compositions nor regional fat distribution, which weakens its credibility in predicting obesity-related metabolic risks and leads to heterogeneity or even conflicting epidemiologic relevance. Consequently, other anthropometric indices have been developed, including waist circumference, waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and body composition measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), which may be better surrogates for reflecting central obesity. However, the available evidence on the association between central obesity indices and mortality risk is not sufficient, so it remains unclear whether the obesity paradox reflected by BMI is a real existence or an artifact of anthropometric measures. It is of concern that the persistence of conflicting findings on the relationship between obesity and survival may misinterpret the considerable efforts toward weight control.

Therefore, we conducted this study in US adults from the 2009–2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The objectives of this study were to (i) examine the association of BMI and WHtR with all-cause and cause-specific mortality, using them as proxies for overall obesity and central obesity, respectively, (ii) characterize the association of other anthropometric indices reflecting overall obesity or central obesity with mortality risk, and (iii) attempt to explore the possible reasons for the discrepancy between anthropometric measures and the outcomes according to the correlation between anthropometric indices and DXA-based visceral fat measurements. We hypothesize that the obesity paradox may not be real but an artifact of anthropometric measures.

Study population

NHANES is a historical, nationally representative survey of the U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population. The survey uses a multistage stratified probability cluster sampling design and incorporates participant weights to ensure accuracy in reflecting the demographics of the U.S. Census during the same time period [ 16 ]. We extracted data from five consecutive cycles of the NHANES database (2009–2010, 2011–2012, 2013–2014, 2015–2016, and 2017–2018). The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All adult participants provided written informed consent, and all NHANES protocols were approved by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Ethics Review Board [ 17 ]. Of the 49,693 adults who participated in the 5 NHANES cycles, 21,340 were excluded because they were younger than 18 years ( n = 19,341), pregnant ( n = 247), had missing weight or height data ( n = 1,596), had a BMI less than 10 kg/m 2 or greater than 60 kg/m 2 ( n = 73), and had missing follow-up information ( n = 83). Finally, 28,353 individuals were included in the analysis (Supplementary material Figure S 1 ).

Anthropometric measures

Participants wore disposable examination gowns and baseline weight, height and waist circumference were measured by trained health technicians to ensure methodological consistency. Waist circumference was measured at the uppermost edge of the right and left ilium, and waist circumference data were available for 26,998 individuals. The following anthropometric measures were examined, including overall obesity indices (BMI, body surface area [BSA], and standardized weight percentage) and central obesity indices (WHtR, waist circumference, body roundness index [BRI], weight-adjusted-waist index [WWI], relative fat mass [RFM], and body shape index [BSI]). The overall obesity indices were calculated based on weight and height, while the central obesity indices were calculated based on waist circumference and height (see Graphical abstract). According to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, individuals were divided into five BMI categories: underweight, < 18.5 kg/m 2 ; normal weight, 18.5–24.9 kg/m 2 ; overweight, 25–29.9 kg/m 2 ; class I obesity, 30–34.9 kg/m 2 ; and class II or III obesity, ≥ 35 kg/m 2 . For analyses using the WHtR, individuals were categorized as follows: < 0.50, 0.50–0.59, 0.60–0.69, 0.70–0.79, ≥ 0.80, with WHtR < 0.5 being the normal range. DXA-based visceral adipose tissue (VAT) measurements were available for 12,792 individuals, and VAT area and mass were measured at the L4 and L5 intervertebral spaces.

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, cancer mortality and other-cause mortality. Mortality data from the date of enrollment through December 31, 2019 were obtained by linking the NHANES dataset to death certificate records from the National Death Index (NDI) provided by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) [ 18 ]. Cause-specific mortality was defined based on the recorded NCHS underlying classification of death (UCOD). Cardiovascular deaths were defined as deaths from heart disease and deaths from cerebrovascular disease. Cancer deaths were defined as deaths due to malignant neoplasms.

A wide range of covariates were considered, including age, sex, ethnicity, education, marital status, poverty income ratio, smoking status, alcohol consumption, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, BMI (for WHtR analyses) or waist circumference (for BMI analyses), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cancer, aspirin, lipid-lowering drugs, hypoglycemic agents, and laboratory measurements (white blood cell count, hemoglobin, albumin, creatinine, urea nitrogen, glycohemoglobin, total cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C]). Demographic and health information was collected by experienced interviewers using a computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) system and reviewed for completeness, consistency, and logicality to ensure data quality. Physical examinations were performed at a dedicated mobile examination center (MEC) using a uniform methodology and laboratory measurements were performed using the Beckman Coulter DxH 800 instrument for complete blood counts, and the Roche Cobas 6000 (c501 module) analyzer for standard biochemistry indices.

Statistical analysis

All analyses were performed using R software (version 4.2.0) and EmpowerStats (X&Y Solutions, Inc., Boston, MA). Statistical significance was defined as a 2-tailed p-value < 0.05. Sample weights, stratification, and clustering were incorporated in all analyses to account for unequal selection and nonresponse probabilities. Baseline characteristics were expressed as means with standard deviations (SDs), medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs), or numbers with percentages and were compared by one-way analysis of variance, Kruskal–Wallis test, and chi-squared test. Data on covariates were more than 93% complete (Supplementary material Table S 1 ). Missing values were imputed using chained equation multiple imputation ( n = 5 data sets).

Restricted cubic spline curves based on Cox models were used to visualize the continuous association between BMI or WHtR and mortality. The inflection points of the mortality risk were estimated and the effect sizes before and after which were reported. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of all-cause and cause-specific mortality for categorical and continuous WHtR. Proportional hazard assumptions were tested and confirmed by Schoenfeld's residual estimates and log(time) plots. Cumulative all-cause mortality for the BMI and WHtR groups was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, with the interval from the date of examination to the date of death or the end of follow-up as the time scale. Fine and Gray competing risk models were used for cause-specific mortality, with deaths from the two remaining causes as competing outcomes. The associations between other anthropometric indices and mortality were also visualized using restricted cubic spline curves. Linear regression fitting and Pearson's correlation coefficient were used to test the correlation between anthropometric indices and VAT measurements.

Sensitivity analyses were performed. First, we examined the association between other anthropometric indices (BSA, standardized weight percentage, waist circumference, BRI, WWI, RFM and BSI) as continuous variables and outcomes using the COX proportional hazards models. Second, we performed stratified analyses with subgroups of interest, including age, sex, ethnicity, and presence of diabetes mellitus. Third, individuals with less than 1 year of follow-up were excluded to minimize the potential bias for reverse causality. Fourth, complete case analyses were performed using only complete data for all covariates to assess whether missing data distorted the current results.

The sample included 28,353 individuals from the 2009–2018 NHANES data sets, weighted to represent 231 million US adults. During a median follow-up of 5.9 years, 2091 (7.4%) all-cause deaths, 606 (2.2%) cardiovascular deaths, 519 (1.8%) cancer deaths, and 966 (3.4%) other-cause deaths were recorded, respectively. BMI, BSA and standardized weight percentage were available for all individuals. Waist circumference was available for 95.2% of individuals, as were WHtR, BRI, WWI, RFM, and BSI. Of the total population, 32.1% were classified as overweight and 37.8% as obese, with a mean BMI of 29.0 (SD 6.8) kg/m 2 , while 83.0% had a WHtR outside the normal range of < 0.5, with a mean WHtR of 0.6 (SD 0.1). Individuals with higher BMI or WHtR were older, more likely to be non-Hispanic blacks, less likely to be current smokers, had a higher prevalence of ASCVD and diabetes mellitus, and had higher white blood cell and lower HDL-C levels. All-cause mortality increased progressively with increasing WHtR, while the opposite was present for BMI (Table 1 and Supplementary material Table S 2 ).

Association between BMI or WHtR and mortality

In restricted cubic spline analyses, there was an inversely J-shaped association between continuous BMI and mortality, with risk inflection points for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cancer mortality, and other-cause mortality at BMIs of 27.6, 25.0, 25.3, and 29.2 kg/m 2 , respectively. The risk of death decreased sharply before the inflection point and remained almost constant thereafter. Conversely, there was a positively J-shaped association between continuous WHtR and mortality, with risk inflection points for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and other-cause mortality occurring at WHtRs of 0.61, 0.58, and 0.62, respectively. The risk of death remained stable until the inflection point and then increased sharply and significantly. No significant association was found between WHtR and cancer death (Fig. 1 ). In Cox proportional hazards analyses, there was a gradual increase in the association between the WHtR category and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and other-cause mortality. In addition, when WHtR was examined as a continuous variable, each 0.1 increase in WHtR was associated with a 36.8%, 43.7%, and 47.6% increase in all-cause, cardiovascular, and other-cause mortality, respectively (Table 2 ).

Nonlinear association between continuous BMI or WHtR and mortality. A-D BMI and mortality. E – H WHtR and mortality. HRs (solid lines) and 95% CIs (shaded areas) are based on weighted restricted cubic splines. The gray areas in the background show the distributions (histograms) of BMI or WHtR in the population. Solid dots represent risk inflection points for nonlinear associations. Effect size for per unit change in BMI (1 kg/m 2 ) and WHtR (0.1) before and after the inflection point are shown separately. Models were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, waist circumference (for BMI analysis) or BMI (for WHtR analysis), education level, marital status, poverty income ratio, smoking status, alcohol consumption, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, ASCVD, diabetes mellitus, COPD, cancer, aspirin, lipid-lowering drugs, hypoglycemic agents, and laboratory measurements (white blood cell count, hemoglobin, albumin, creatinine, urea nitrogen, glycohemoglobin, total cholesterol, and HDL-C). ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. HR, hazard ratio. CI, confidence interval

Cumulative mortality according to BMI or WHtR groups

The cumulative mortality curve showed a gradual decrease in mortality among groups with higher BMI. Specifically, the underweight group had the highest mortality, followed by the normal weight group, while the groups with overweight and obesity had the lowest mortality. Cumulative morbidity for WHtR showed the opposite pattern. Cumulative all-cause, cardiovascular, and other-cause deaths progressively increased in groups with incrementally higher WHtR, whereas there was no evidence that higher WHtR was associated with higher cumulative cancer mortality (Fig. 2 ).

Cumulative mortality by BMI or WHtR groups. Cumulative incidence for mortality was estimated according to ( A ) BMI and ( B ) WHtR groups, and all-cause and cause-specific mortality was followed up to December 31, 2019. The Fine and Gray competing risk models were used for cause-specific mortality, with deaths from the remaining two causes as competing risks

The concordance between BMI and WHtR

Although a strong correlation between BMI and WHtR was observed ( r 2 = 0.839), there were significant differences in agreement between subcategories. Specifically, 97.6% (489 out of 501) of underweight individuals had WHtRs within the normal range, whereas less than half of normal-weight individuals (49.7%, 3807 out of 7653) had WHtRs < 0.5, with the remaining half having WHtRs between 0.5 and 0.7. The concordance between BMI and WHtR was quite high among overweight and obese individuals, most of whom had WHtRs above the normal range (Fig. 3 ).

Correlation between BMI and WHtR categories. A WHtR percentage across BMI categories. B Correlation between BMI and WHtR categories

Correlation between anthropometric indices and VAT measurements

In addition to BMI and WHtR, we also examined the correlation of body weight and waist circumference with VAT, as the latter two are the basis for calculating the overall and central obesity indices, respectively. Overall, Pearson's correlations between anthropometric indices and VAT measures were modest. However, the correlations between VAT measures and WHtR or waist circumference were stronger than those with BMI or body weight, ranging from r 2 = 0.566–0.614 for WHtR and waist circumference to r 2 = 0.426–0.473 for BMI and body weight (Fig. 4 ).

Correlation between anthropometric indices and visceral adipose tissue measurements Pink lines show linear regressions of anthropometric indices on visceral adipose area ( A - D ) and linear regressions of anthropometric indices on visceral adipose mass ( E – H )

Other anthropometric indices and mortality

Other central obesity indices (waist circumference, BRI, WWI, RFM and BSI) also had positively J-shaped associations with all-cause, cardiovascular, and other-cause mortality, but no significant associations with cancer mortality (Fig. 5 ). Other overall obesity indices (BSA and standardized body weight percentage) had inversely J-shaped associations with mortality, whereas the association between BSA and cancer death did not appear to be significant (Supplementary material Figure S 2 ).

Nonlinear association between other central obesity indices and mortality HRs (solid lines) and 95% CIs (shaded areas) are based on weighted restricted cubic splines. The models were adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, BMI, education, marital status, poverty income ratio, smoking status, alcohol consumption, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, ASCVD, diabetes mellitus, COPD, cancer, aspirin, lipid-lowering drugs, hypoglycemic agents, and laboratory measurements (white blood cell count, hemoglobin, albumin, creatinine, urea nitrogen, glycohemoglobin, total cholesterol, and HDL-C). ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. HR, hazard ratio. CI, confidence interval

Sensitivity analysis

The results of the sensitivity analyses were generally consistent with those of the primary analyses. First, using the COX proportional hazards models, other central obesity indices (waist circumference, BRI, WWI, RFM and BSI) were positively associated with all-cause, cardiovascular, and other-cause mortality. In contrast, other overall obesity indices (BSA and standardized body weight percentage) were negatively associated with mortality (Supplementary material Table S 3 ). Second, in subgroups stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, and diabetes, the association pattern between continuous BMI or WHtR and mortality was consistent with the primary analysis (Supplementary material Figures S 3 -S 6 ). Third, exclusion of individuals with less than 1 year of follow-up did not substantially change the results (Supplementary material Figure S 7 ). Fourth, a complete case analysis showed that missing data did not distort the current findings (Supplementary material Figure S 8 ).

In a large nationally representative cohort of US adults, we examined the association between various anthropometric measures and all-cause and cause-specific mortality with a maximum follow-up of 11.3 years. We found that BMI and WHtR had diametrically opposite associations with mortality risk. The association between BMI and mortality was inversely J-shaped, whereas the association between WHtR and mortality was positively J-shaped. Other anthropometric indices of overall obesity also suggested a negative association between obesity and mortality, whereas none of the central obesity indices supported such a counterintuitive relationship. The current findings suggest that the obesity paradox may be an artifact of anthropometric measures, and that central obesity indices were independently and positively associated with all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and death from diseases other than cancer, eliminating the possibility that the obesity paradox exists.

The obesity-survival paradox has been previously reported in studies of critically ill patients, the elderly, and the general population [8-10]. A meta-analysis involving 218,532 patients with cardiovascular disease also demonstrated that total mortality was lower in overweight and obese patients than in normal weight patients, with a hazard ratio of approximately 0.70 [ 19 ]. Using BMI as an anthropometric indicator, we replicated this counterintuitive association through an inversely J-shaped pattern, whereby the risk of death decreased gradually within the initial units of BMI and then reached a plateau. All the nadirs of mortality risk were in the overweight range, lending further credence that a higher BMI may be protective for survival. In addition, when other indices of overall obesity were examined, the results were similar to those of the BMI, suggesting that overall obesity indices derived from weight-based calculations are consistent in estimating mortality risk.

Previous findings on the association between central obesity indices and adverse outcomes have been heterogeneous, with some studies reporting J-shaped or monotonic positive associations and others showing negative or null associations [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 22 ]. Methodologically, some of these studies did not address the hard endpoint of mortality, some focused on all-cause mortality and lacked data on cause-specific mortality, and some analyzed only a single anthropometric index. Our results provide evidence on these unaddressed issues. We found a positively J-shaped association between WHtR and all-cause, cardiovascular, and other-cause mortality, independent of BMI. The risk inflection point occurred around a WHtR of 0.6, slightly above the currently recommended threshold of 0.5, with slight change in the risk of death until the inflection point, followed by a sharp and linear increase. This positive association pattern was consistently observed for other anthropometric indices of central obesity, including waist circumference, BRI, WWI, RFM and BSI, albeit slightly attenuated for RFM and BSI. The current findings are in accordance with those of several recent large studies revealing an independent positive association between central obesity indices and adverse outcomes (e.g., premature mortality, heart failure hospitalization, cardiometabolic risk), some of which used a Mendelian randomized design to infer causality [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. We did not find a substantial association between WHtR and cancer mortality. The association between obesity and cancer incidence and mortality varies by cancer site. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has reported seven cancers for which there is compelling evidence of a dose–response relationship with obesity, including cancers of esophagus, colorectum, pancreas, cardia, liver, gallbladder, and kidney [ 26 ]. However, the three most common cancers in the current cohort were breast (15.4%), prostate (15.3%), and skin cancers (14.8%), which accounted for nearly half of individuals with cancers. This may explain our inability to find a clear association between obesity and cancer death in this nationally representative population.

The divergent association pattern may be due to differences in population-level risk classification using different anthropometric measures. In the present study, despite a strong linear correlation between BMI and WHtR, the consideration of WHtR resulted in a significant reclassification of individuals with normal weight. Only half of the normal weight individuals fell within the normal range of WHtR, suggesting that the pathophysiological milieu of the remaining half may be overlooked. There was less misclassification of overweight or obese individuals, with 98% having a WHtR greater than 0.5. A minority of overweight or obese individuals have a normal WHtR, which may be due to increased muscle mass rather than fat accumulation. These individuals, known as metabolically healthy obese (MHO), have been previously documented [ 27 ]. Our findings suggest that BMI is not sufficient to identify the high-risk phenotype for central obesity as defined by the WHtR, especially in those with normal weight (underestimation of risk). Previous evidence has also shown that high-risk characteristics for central obesity include a higher ratio of visceral-to-subcutaneous adipose tissue, a larger waist circumference, and a higher ratio of waist circumference to hip or leg circumference [ 28 ], which can be captured by central obesity indices rather than BMI alone.

Epidemiological and genetic evidence has shown that the regional distribution of fat may be more important than its absolute mass in predicting obesity-related metabolic risk [ 14 , 25 , 29 ]. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allow accurate quantification of the body compositions at each level, thereby identifying subcutaneous adipose tissue (e.g., gluteal and thigh fat) and VAT (e.g., intra-abdominal and ectopic fat) [ 30 , 31 ]. However, CT involves ionizing radiation and MRI is time consuming, both are expensive and require specially trained personnel to perform. DXA serves as a viable alternative with low radiation exposure and low cost, and has been validated by CT and MRI in identifying the high-risk metabolic phenotype [ 32 , 33 ]. We found moderate correlations between anthropometric indices and VAT measurements based on DXA, it is in line with the expectation that an anthropometric indicator that can only make a rough estimate of fat distribution. Specifically, WHtR and waist circumference had stronger correlations with VAT measurements than BMI, whereas body weight had the weakest correlation, and the correlation coefficients were in agreement with previous studies [ 32 ]. Mechanistically, subcutaneous adipose tissue plays a critical role in energy storage and thermoregulation, and when its storage capacity is saturated, adipotoxic VAT deposition occurs. VAT exerts adipocyte biological effects through increased secretion of pro-inflammatory adipokines and decreased secretion of anti-inflammatory adipocytokines [ 2 , 34 ]. Consequently, VAT creates an atherogenic, diabetogenic, and inflammatory milieu leading to downstream metabolic dysregulation and cardiovascular damage [ 35 ]. Because routine measurement of VAT may be impractical, the use of alternative anthropometric indicators as simple estimates in clinical practice is promising. The stronger correlation between WHtR and VAT measurements compared to BMI may partly explain why WHtR provides a better estimate for adverse outcomes.

The growing obesity epidemic is associated with substantial mortality, morbidity, and health care expenditures. Therefore, obesity has been included in the global targets for the control of non-communicable diseases (NCD) [ 36 ]. Based on current research, we have several considerations. First, it is imperative to implement comprehensive and effective prevention strategies that focus on promoting healthy lifestyles and controlling excessive weight gain. However, the existence of the obesity-survival paradox may cause confusion and hesitation among the public and policy makers. Our findings suggest that the obesity paradox may be an artifact of anthropometric measures rather than an actual biological advantage of excess fat storage, which dispels concerns that being overweight or obese improves survival over being normal weight. Second, susceptibility to obesity-related metabolic risk may be mediated by visceral fat, and anthropometric measures of central obesity provide independent and additive information beyond BMI in characterizing adverse risk. A growing number of obesity professional societies have recommended that central obesity indices (waist circumference or WHtR) should be routinely used alongside BMI for the stratification and management of obesity [ 15 , 37 ]. Third, accurate assessment of obesity requires consideration of the validity, feasibility, and standardization of assessment indicators. Measuring waist circumference alone is inadequate because it does not consider the effect of height, which is significantly and inversely associated with health risks such as cardiovascular disease and cancer [ 38 , 39 ]. Waist-hip ratio is a valid indicator for considering both VAT and lower-body subcutaneous adipose tissue. However, hip circumference is less readily available, making waist-to-hip ratio less practical. The WHtR corrects waist circumference by height, normalizing the threshold to 0.5, regardless of gender, age, and ethnicity. This simplifies the health message to the notion that waist circumference should not exceed half of one's height, offering a more feasible and pragmatic measure for both health professionals and the general population. Finally, further research should focus on whether the adoption of these anthropometric metrics can meaningfully enhance risk prediction algorithms beyond traditional measurements, and whether these anthropometric indicators can serve as valid targets for risk reduction.

Strengths and limitations

We applied the weights in each of the models to account for oversampling of minority groups, survey nonresponse, and post-stratification adjustments. Baseline anthropometric measurements were completed by trained technicians rather than self-reported height and weight, thereby mitigating anthropometric bias. A wide range of covariates were adjusted to maximize consideration of confounding factors. Mortality events were provided by the NCHS using an enhanced linkage algorithm that allowed for 98.5% matching accuracy. Several limitations should be noted. First, due to the inherent limitations of the observational study, we cannot prove a causality relationship. Second, despite our efforts to comprehensively adjust for confounders, residual confounders may still exist. However, the statistical E-values for the associations between WHtR > 0.8 and all-cause, cardiovascular, and other-cause mortality were 3.83, 6.64 and 7.14, respectively, implying that the unmeasured confounders should have an association with the exposure (WHtR > 0.8) and outcome (mortality) comparable to these values to negate the current results. Third, although we excluded individuals with less than 1 year of follow-up to rule out reverse causation and obtain similar risk estimates, complete elimination of reverse causation cannot be achieved because individuals may survive with a disease for a longer period before succumbing to it. Fourth, DXA data were available for only half of the cohort, so the correlation between anthropometric indices and VAT measures should be interpreted with caution.

Anthropometric measures reflecting central obesity were independently and positively associated with mortality risk, eliminating the possibility of an obesity paradox. WHtR provides additional information beyond BMI and can be used as a valid anthropometric indicator for physical examination screening.

Availability of data and materials

The NHANES data that support the findings of this study are available on the Center for Disease Control web site ( https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/ ).

World Obesity Atlas 2022, World Obesity Federation. Available online: https://www.worldobesity.org/resources/resource-library/world-obesity-atlas-2022 . Accessed in May 2022.

González-Muniesa P, Mártinez-González MA, Hu FB, et al. Obesity Nature reviews Disease primers. 2017;3:17034.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Jayedi A, Rashidy-Pour A, Khorshidi M, Shab-Bidar S. Body mass index, abdominal adiposity, weight gain and risk of developing hypertension: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of more than 2 3 million participants. Obesity reviews an official journal of the international association for the study of obesity. 2018;19(5):654–67.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Lu Y, Hajifathalian K, Ezzati M, Woodward M, Rimm EB, Danaei G. Metabolic mediators of the effects of body-mass index, overweight, and obesity on coronary heart disease and stroke: a pooled analysis of 97 prospective cohorts with 1·8 million participants. Lancet (London, England). 2014;383(9921):970–83.

Compston JE, Flahive J, Hosmer DW, et al. Relationship of weight, height, and body mass index with fracture risk at different sites in postmenopausal women: the Global Longitudinal study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW). Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. 2014;29(2):487–93.

Kyrgiou M, Kalliala I, Markozannes G, et al. Adiposity and cancer at major anatomical sites: umbrella review of the literature. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2017;356:j477.

Afshin A, Forouzanfar MH, Reitsma MB, et al. Health Effects of Overweight and Obesity in 195 Countries over 25 Years. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(1):13–27.

Lv Y, Mao C, Gao X, et al. The obesity paradox is mostly driven by decreased noncardiovascular disease mortality in the oldest old in China: a 20-year prospective cohort study. Nature aging. 2022;2(5):389–96.

Sakr Y, Alhussami I, Nanchal R, et al. Being Overweight Is Associated With Greater Survival in ICU Patients: Results From the Intensive Care Over Nations Audit. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(12):2623–32.

Lu JL, Molnar MZ, Naseer A, Mikkelsen MK, Kalantar-Zadeh K, Kovesdy CP. Association of age and BMI with kidney function and mortality: a cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015;3(9):704–14.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Schetz M, De Jong A, Deane AM, et al. Obesity in the critically ill: a narrative review. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(6):757–69.

Chandramouli C, Tay WT, Bamadhaj NS, et al. Association of obesity with heart failure outcomes in 11 Asian regions: A cohort study. PLoS Med. 2019;16(9):e1002916.

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Tsujimoto T, Kajio H. Abdominal Obesity Is Associated With an Increased Risk of All-Cause Mortality in Patients With HFpEF. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(22):2739–49.

Ashwell M, Gunn P, Gibson S. Waist-to-height ratio is a better screening tool than waist circumference and BMI for adult cardiometabolic risk factors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 2012;13(3):275–86.

Ross R, Neeland IJ, Yamashita S, et al. Waist circumference as a vital sign in clinical practice: a Consensus Statement from the IAS and ICCR Working Group on Visceral Obesity. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2020;16(3):177–89.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). About the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/about_nhanes.htm . Accessed on 21 Nov 2022.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). NCHS Research Ethics Review Board (ERB) Approval. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/irba98.htm . Accessed on 21 Nov 2022.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). NCHS Public-use Linked Mortality Files. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data-linkage/mortality-public.htm . Accessed on 21 Nov 2022.

Niedziela J, Hudzik B, Niedziela N, et al. The obesity paradox in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol. 2014;29(11):801–12.

Czernichow S, Kengne AP, Stamatakis E, Hamer M, Batty GD. Body mass index, waist circumference and waist-hip ratio: which is the better discriminator of cardiovascular disease mortality risk? evidence from an individual-participant meta-analysis of 82 864 participants from nine cohort studies. Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 2011;12(9):680–7.

Carmienke S, Freitag MH, Pischon T, et al. General and abdominal obesity parameters and their combination in relation to mortality: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013;67(6):573–85.

Chen Y, Yang Y, Jiang H, Liang X, Wang Y, Lu W. Associations of BMI and Waist Circumference with All-Cause Mortality: A 22-Year Cohort Study. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2019;27(4):662–9.

Jayedi A, Soltani S, Zargar MS, Khan TA, Shab-Bidar S. Central fatness and risk of all cause mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of 72 prospective cohort studies. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2020;370:m3324.

PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Butt JH, Petrie MC, Jhund PS, et al. Anthropometric measures and adverse outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: revisiting the obesity paradox. Eur Heart J. 2023;44(13):1136–53.

Emdin CA, Khera AV, Natarajan P, et al. Genetic Association of Waist-to-Hip Ratio With Cardiometabolic Traits, Type 2 Diabetes, and Coronary Heart Disease. JAMA. 2017;317(6):626–34.

Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, Grosse Y, Bianchini F, Straif K. Body Fatness and Cancer-Viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(8):794–8.

Phillips CM. Metabolically healthy obesity across the life course: epidemiology, determinants, and implications. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2017;1391(1):85–100.

Yaghootkar H, Scott RA, White CC, et al. Genetic evidence for a normal-weight “metabolically obese” phenotype linking insulin resistance, hypertension, coronary artery disease, and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 2014;63(12):4369–77.

Browning LM, Hsieh SD, Ashwell M. A systematic review of waist-to-height ratio as a screening tool for the prediction of cardiovascular disease and diabetes: 0·5 could be a suitable global boundary value. Nutr Res Rev. 2010;23(2):247–69.

Shulman GI. Ectopic fat in insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and cardiometabolic disease. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(12):1131–41.

Neeland IJ, Poirier P, Després JP. Cardiovascular and Metabolic Heterogeneity of Obesity: Clinical Challenges and Implications for Management. Circulation. 2018;137(13):1391–406.

Kaul S, Rothney MP, Peters DM, et al. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for quantification of visceral fat. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2012;20(6):1313–8.

Borga M, West J, Bell JD, et al. Advanced body composition assessment: from body mass index to body composition profiling. Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research. 2018;66(5):1–9.

Sakers A, De Siqueira MK, Seale P, Villanueva CJ. Adipose-tissue plasticity in health and disease. Cell. 2022;185(3):419–46.

Neeland IJ, Ross R, Després JP, et al. Visceral and ectopic fat, atherosclerosis, and cardiometabolic disease: a position statement. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019;7(9):715–25.

NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC). Trends in adult body-mass index in 200 countries from 1975 to 2014: a pooled analysis of 1698 population-based measurement studies with 19·2 million participants. Lancet (London, England). 2016;387(10026):1377–96.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: Guidelines. Obesity: identification, assessment and management. In: London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). 2023.

Google Scholar

Paajanen TA, Oksala NK, Kuukasjärvi P, Karhunen PJ. Short stature is associated with coronary heart disease: a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2010;31(14):1802–9.

Davey Smith G, Hart C, Upton M, et al. Height and risk of death among men and women: aetiological implications of associations with cardiorespiratory disease and cancer mortality. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000;54(2):97–103.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not Applicable.

This research received no external funding.

Author information

Shan Li and Zhiqing Fu are contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Cardiology, Second Medical Center, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China

Shan Li & Zhiqing Fu

National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Diseases, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China

Shan Li, Zhiqing Fu & Wei Zhang

Department of Outpatient, The Second Medical Center, Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.L. has fully obtained all of the data and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the analysis. S.L. and Z.F. contribute to the conceptualization and study design. S.L. and W.Z. contribute to the acquisition, statistical analysis and interpretation of the data. W.Z. and Z.F. contribute to the drafting of the manuscript. All authors are responsible for the critical revision of the manuscript for important content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shan Li .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent of participate.

All the NHANES protocols were approved by the National Center for Health Statistics ethics review board (Protocol #2005–06, effective beginning October 26, 2004; Protocol #2011–17, effective beginning October 26, 2010; Protocol #2018–01, effective beginning October 26, 2017). Written informed consent was obtained from all adult participants.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Li, S., Fu, Z. & Zhang, W. Association of anthropometric measures with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in US adults: revisiting the obesity paradox. BMC Public Health 24 , 929 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18418-9

Download citation

Received : 28 November 2023

Accepted : 22 March 2024

Published : 01 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18418-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Central obesity
Overall obesity
Obesity paradox

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Submission enquiries: [email protected]
General enquiries: [email protected]

Critics say Beyoncé's new album 'Cowboy Carter' is a virtuosic riff on the country genre — but it could have used some editing

Beyoncé released her eighth studio album "Cowboy Carter" on Friday.
She described the country-inspired project as a "continuation of 'Renaissance'" and "an experience."
Critics are raving about the album's ambitious scope, especially on "Ya Ya" and "II Most Wanted."

Beyoncé has once again changed the game with a digital drop, unveiling her eighth studio album, "Cowboy Carter," on Friday to overwhelming praise.

The second installment in a three-act series that launched with " Renaissance " in 2022 draws heavily from Southern iconography, folk, blues, soul, and Americana influences. The tracklist boasts features from Nashville legends like Willie Nelson, Dolly Parton, and Linda Martell .

"I hope that you can hear my heart and soul, and all the love and passion that I poured into every detail and every sound," Beyoncé wrote on Instagram . "I hope this music is an experience, creating another journey where you can close your eyes, start from the beginning and never stop."

Reviews for "Cowboy Carter" are rolling in. Here's what critics are saying so far.

The sonic palette of "Cowboy Carter" is more diverse than its title may suggest.

"Country, gospel, soul, blues, R&B, pop, psychedelic rock, and more all find themselves as key members of Beyoncé's country. Her country is more dimensional and multifaceted than Nashville could ever dream of, because Black folks in the country had to imagine and conjure worlds that did not even exist during enslavement and sharecropping in the heavily segregated Jim Crow South." — Taylor Crumpton, The Daily Beast

"Across 27 tracks, almost all with compellingly muscular melodies, she whips and neigh-neighs through every conceivable form of classic and modern country, roping in elements of opera, rock and hip-hop at her commanding, virtuosic whim." — Helen Brown, The Independent

"It's a deep stylistic smorgasbord that gets scattershot in the final third of the album's 27 tracks (several of them interludes) with trap beats and fiddles vying for the front row." — Melissa Ruggieri, USA Today

"With this endlessly entertaining project, she gets to be a warrior of female and Black pride and a sweetheart of the radio. Because being Beyoncé means never having to pretend to be just one thing." — Chris Willman, Variety

"So what kind of album is it? It's a journey." — Shane O'Neill, The Washington Post

The album's length works against it, though it doesn't ruin the overall effect.

"It could have used some editing. For its five-year gestation, nearly 80-minute runtime, and history-making ambitions, 'Cowboy Carter' still feels somewhat undercooked." — Chris Kelly, The Washington Post

"At 1 hour 18 minutes long, it's a lot to take in one sitting and being in the saddle does start to chafe, but there's enough gold here to keep the stars and stripes aloft." — Alan Pedder, The Line of Best Fit

"There are moments when it starts to feel less like a coherent statement than one of those long 21st-century albums that offers listeners a selection box of tracks to pick and choose playlist additions from. Or perhaps its wild lurches into eclecticism are the point. Unwieldy as it is, it displays its author's ability to bend musical styles to her will." — Alexis Petridis, The Guardian

"Some of the time — not most, but some — 'Cowboy Carter' is boring . It's too long . There are too many ballads. There are too many sketched-out acoustic lullabies that almost function as skits.

"But even when it's boring , 'Cowboy Carter' is nowhere near bad . The whole thing is put together so meticulously." — Tom Breihan, Stereogum

Despite its ambitious scope, the album still feels intimate. "Cowboy Carter" doubles as a political statement and a personal ode to Beyoncé's roots.

"Hitting her stride immediately with powerful curtain raiser 'Ameriican Requiem,' Beyoncé wastes no time in laying out her country credentials and pain at having them so coldly dismissed . But it's not sympathy she's after; if mainstream country can't stand her, she'll leave it choking in the sawdust as she hoedowns on regardless." — Alan Pedder, The Line of Best Fit

"Throughout it all, Beyoncé's hands are confidently and charismatically on the reins. The righteous zeal of her mission, and the giddy range of sonic adventuring, repeatedly gave me chills I haven't felt since the release of 'Lemonade.' Back then she was fighting for her marriage. Now she's fighting for a major culture shift." — Helen Brown, The Independent

"Legacies — musical ones, family ones — have been a theme of Beyoncé's music. Sometimes she's correcting artistic history and blending genres. Sometimes she's inserting her children into her art. One way or another, she's always tugging at roots." — Helena Andrews-Dyer, The Washington Post

"Beyoncé leans into the art of storytelling that is so central to country music, reflecting on authenticity, roots, legacy, and purpose—and offering a sharp contrast to the unassailable pop star veneer we typically see from the singer." — André-Naquian Wheeler, Vogue

"'Cowboy Carter' is such a grand statement of intent that it feels like it could be her ultimate say on identity and purpose. The fact that it's coming from outside her usual wheelhouse makes it even more impressive." — Neil Z. Yeung, AllMusic

"Ya Ya" is an eclectic highlight, blending Beyoncé's soulful voice with nods to Nancy Sinatra and The Beach Boys.

"What do you get if you take a sample of Nancy Sinatra's 'These Boots Are Made for Walkin,' mix it with an interpolation of the Beach Boys' 'Good Vibrations' and douse the whole concoction in the essence of Tina Turner?

"Well, you get 'Ya Ya,' of course, the best song on 'Cowboy Carter.'" — Kyle Denis, Billboard

"On the bonkers 'Ya Ya,' she tells us she's above 'petty' prejudice because she's 'a clever girl.' A boast she then backs up by spinning a sample of Nancy Sinatra's 'These Boots are Made for Walkin' into quotes from The Beach Boys' 'Good Vibrations,' staking her family's claim to life in America and calling on her ladies to 'pop it, jerk it, let loose' to a funky country soul groove." — Helen Brown, The Independent

"The best song on 'Cowboy Carter' is 'Ya Ya.' Following another snappy introduction from Martell, Beyoncé basks in an echo effect on her girlish vocals as she finger snaps and calls for a beat. You can picture the video of her high-stepping and hair-flinging as she slinks and slides around the retro groove." — Melissa Ruggieri, USA Today

"The song is sure to be a showstopper when she gets her ya-yas out on tour." — Mankaprr Conteh and Joseph Hudak, Rolling Stone

"II Most Wanted," a duet with Miley Cyrus, is another critical favorite.

"'II Most Wanted,' on the other hand, feels effortlessly top-drawer country. Miley Cyrus was born with this kind of song in her mouth, and Beyoncé more than holds her own." — Alan Pedder, The Line of Best Fit

"Beyoncé magnanimously offers Cyrus the opening verse, and the twosome trade lines, not sparring, but complementing. Sometimes they sound like a modern-day Thelma and Louise ('I'll be your shotgun rider 'til the day I die'), steeped in limitless loyalty as they reflect on aging and love. The skipping acoustic guitar is a mere backdrop to these vocal powerhouses, with Cyrus' gravel the equilibrium to Beyoncé's honey." — Melissa Ruggieri, USA Today

"It's the reimagining of 'Landslide' as a Bonnie-and-Clyde anthem, 'II Most Wanted,' that most deftly melds the past and the present. Miley Cyrus and her whiskey rasp hold their own as two pop chameleons ponder a day when they won't be young." — Chris Kelly, The Washington Post

"As two of contemporary pop's most powerful voices, they could have easily tried to out-diva each other — but the resulting track is tastefully restrained." — Shaad D'Souza, Pitchfork

Business Insider's senior music reporter rates the album a 9.3/10.

The sequel to "Renaissance" is yet another feat of vocal finesse, archival research, and most of all, sonic cohesion.

Considering Beyoncé's exceptional discography, this shouldn't be surprising. But her ability to reference her forebears, assemble a diverse team of collaborators, and still create a lucid, unified project — like a conductor leading an orchestra — will never fail to boggle my mind .

Even the interludes on "Cowboy Carter" aren't skippable. However brief, they're always essential to the album's narrative and pulse. Amid the free-flowing brilliance, standout tracks include "Bodyguard," "Jolene," "II Most Wanted," "Ya Ya," and "Tyrant."

Beyoncé's big-picture vision is also what allows her to thrive in so many musical styles. She sees connective tissue and subtle shapes where other artists do not. Beyoncé doesn't simply adapt to a genre; she unspools, analyzes, interprets, and refashions it in her own image.

There's a very good reason she declared, "This ain't a Country album. This is a 'Beyoncé' album."

"Cowboy Carter" is explicitly invested in subverting the very notion of genre, with all its constraints and contrived prestige. It argues that each artist's unique approach is more important than any label or wrapper.

It's a winning argument.

Worth listening to:

"Ameriican Requiem"

"Blackbiird"

"16 Carriages"

"Protector"

"Texas Hold 'Em"

"Bodyguard"

"Spaghettii (feat. Shaboozey)"

"Alliigator Tears"

"Just For Fun"

"II Most Wanted (feat. Miley Cyrus)"

"Levii's Jeans (feat. Post Malone)"

"Oh Louisiana"

"Desert Eagle"

"Riiverdance"

"II Hands II Heaven"

"Sweet Honey Buckin"

Background music:

"Smoke Hour with Willie Nelson"

"Smoke Hour II"

"The Linda Martell Show"

Press skip:

*Final album score based on songs per category (1 point for "Worth listening to," .5 for "Background music," 0 for "Press skip").

Main content

Search form

Make a Gift

Department of Economics

Undergraduate

How to Write a Thank You Email After an Interview

Article written by Christopher Littlefield for Harvard Business Review

You’ve just finished an interview for a job opportunity you’re really excited about. You know you should send a thank you note to your interviewers, but you’re not sure what to write. How much detail should you include? Should you send an email to every person you interviewed with? And what’s really the best way to follow up ?

Here’s some advice on what to say — and not to say — in your message, along with sample email templates. I’ll also cover why writing a thank you note is something you should do, even if it feels like a formality. Let’s start with what to write in your note.

How to Write a Thank You Email

Your email should be short, sincere, and sent within 24 hours of your interview.

1. Address the email to the person who interviewed you and make sure you spell their name correctly. If their name is Christopher and they asked you to call them Chris in the interview, address them as such in your follow-up. If you interviewed with multiple people, it’s a good practice to send each person a brief message as well.

2. Thank the person for their time and consideration.

3. Briefly highlight your draw to the organization. David Lancefield, a former partner at PwC and now CEO coach, suggests that candidates “call out an aspect of the conversation that was particularly interesting or share a helpful hook to help them remember what you spoke about.”

4. Express your continued interest in the job opportunity.

5. Offer to answer any questions.

Lourdes Olvera-Marshall, who teaches networking and career management courses at NYU, recommends jotting down quick notes when you’re interviewing. Write down your interviewer’s name, what you discuss, and a few key words to trigger your memory, so you can make your follow-up message more meaningful. As she told me, “The thank you note starts during the interview.”

What to Avoid in Your Thank You Email

If you don’t want to leave the interviewers with a bad impression, avoid these three common mistakes.

Adding too much detail

Remember that the intention of the message is to say thank you, not to pick up where your interview left off. “Your follow-up is not the place to add all the things you wish you had highlighted in your interview,” Olvera-Marshall warns. When you do, you run the risk of appearing desperate or like you weren’t prepared for the interview.

Making requests

People are busy. Avoid requesting anything that creates additional work. You want to show your interviewer that you’re easy to work with.

And of course, don’t forget to review your email for grammar and spelling before sending. This is an example of your communication.

Sample Thank You Email Templates

Use the samples below to get started, but make sure you customize them to fit your needs.

Subject: Thank you

It was great speaking with you yesterday about being a possible fit for your team. I appreciate the transparency into the project you are working on and what it is like working at [company name]. It seems like an amazing team and an exciting project with huge potential. I am excited about the possibility of working with you. If you have any questions or want to continue our conversation, please reach out at any time.

I look forward to being in touch.

All the best,

Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today and sharing some of the innovative work you and your team are doing to support your clients.

From our conversation, I understand that the pace is fast, the work is top-notch, and as hard as you work, you all have a great time doing it together. People’s passion for their work was tangible and the sense of community was amazing.

I also understand you are looking for a person who can hit the ground running, does not need hand-holding, and is fun to work with. I am confident I am that person.

If you have any questions or want to continue our conversation, please feel free to reach out at any time.

Dear Mr. Cassidy,

I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with me today to discuss the financial planner position at Cascade Associates. I appreciate you sharing the history behind your family business and that you care for every customer as if they were your own family.

From our conversation, I understand that maintaining the legacy of top-notch service is your priority, and you are looking for planners who want to continue that legacy for years to come. As I shared, I have a young family of my own, and I am looking to put down roots with an organization that I can be proud to work for. I am excited about the possibility of joining your team.

Why Is It Important to Send a Thank You Note?

Beyond it being a nice gesture, there are multiple benefits to sending a follow-up message after an interview.

It creates a positive connection with the interviewer(s).

No matter how well your interview went, many hiring managers squeeze multiple interviews into their busy schedules. A thoughtful message helps you leave a lasting positive impression after the interview is over.

It helps you stand out from the crowd.

Investing the time to send a thank you increases your chances of standing out from other applicants. One study found that only one out of four candidates sent thank you messages after their interviews, yet 80% of HR managers said those messages were helpful when reviewing candidates.

It’s an opportunity to demonstrate your professionalism and people skills.

It’s one thing to tell an interviewer you’re detail-oriented and work well with others — it’s another to show them. A well-crafted and timed thank you message illustrates your follow-up, your ability to capture the meeting’s essence in writing, and that you understand the importance of expressing your appreciation for others.

It confirms your interest in the job.

Hiring managers understand that candidates may be interviewing for multiple jobs at the same time. Busy themselves, leaders don’t want to invest time in a candidate who is not invested in the role they’re hiring for. A thank you message confirms that you’re both interested and excited about the role and worth following with.

You may send your message and get a response in minutes, or you may never hear back at all. Either way, investing 15 minutes to express your appreciation may be the difference between getting the job or getting lost in the crowd.

IMAGES

🌷 How to write an academic journal article review. How To Write A
How to Write an Article Review from Scratch. Article review example
How to Write an Article Review: Tips, Outline, Format
(DOC) How-to-Write-a-Journal-Article-Review-APA-Style
What is a Review Article? How to write a Review Article? Purpose and
Article Review Format.docx

VIDEO

How to Write an Article
6 Tips to write a Review Article?
Lecture 11 : Article writing
How to Write a Review Article
How to Write an Article Review
|| ARTICLE WRITING \ARTICLE WRITING FORMAT ||Paragraph writing for 12th,11th,10th and 9th ||

COMMENTS

How to Write an Article Review (with Sample Reviews)
Identify the article. 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.
How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples
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 ...
How to Write an Article Review: Types, Format, & Examples
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: APA Format
How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples
Using the APA Format. Articles appear most commonly in academic journals, newspapers, and websites. If you write an article review in the APA format, you will need to write bibliographical entries for the sources you use: Web: Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
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 Format & Examples
Article review format. The formatting of an article review will always come down to what type of assignment you plan to write and your citation style. Still, you should provide a title page, the course title, your name, and the work date. In certain cases, it may be required to include an abstract of 200 to 300 words.
How to Review a Journal Article
For many kinds of assignments, like a literature review, you may be asked to offer a critique or review of a journal article.This is an opportunity for you as a scholar to offer your qualified opinion and evaluation of how another scholar has composed their article, argument, and research.That means you will be expected to go beyond a simple summary of the article and evaluate it on a deeper ...
How to Write an Article Review: Types, Format, & Examples
How to prepare & format your article. The type a review assesses the reliability the the experimental design, and evaluates the author's translation of findings. Take a look at the following example. Example of Physics Article Review. Critical Review. A critical review involves a balanced critique of a granted article. It encompasses providing ...
Writing Help: The Article Review
For an article review, your task is to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. You are being asked to make judgments, positive or negative, about the content of the article. The criteria you follow to do this will vary based upon your particular academic discipline and the parameters of your ...
How to Write an Article Review
Step 2: Read and Understand the Article. It's super important to read and understand the article before writing your review. Read the article a few times and jot down the notes as you go. Focus on the main arguments, major points, evidence, and how it's structured. For Example:
How to Write an Article Review: Tips, Outline, Format
Article Identification. Start the first paragraph of your review with concise and clear article identification that specifies its title, author, name of the resource (e.g., journal, web, etc.), and the year of publication. Intro. Following the identification, write a short introductory paragraph.
Writing an article REVIEW
A journal article review is written for a reader who is knowledgeable in the discipline and is interested not just in the coverage and content of the article being reviewed, but also in your critical assessment of the ideas and argument that are being presented by the author. Your review might be guided by the following questions:
What is a review article?
A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results. Writing a review of literature is to provide a ...
How to Write an Article Review: Quick & Handy Guide
Article Review Format. Ensuring the proper formatting of an article examination is crucial, and it should consistently align with the citation style specified by your instructor. If you're uncertain, don't hesitate to ask us - write my article review for me, along with additional guidelines to effectively structure your piece. ...
Writing a Literature Review
Writing a Literature Review. A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels ...
How to Write a Literature Review
Examples of literature reviews. Step 1 - Search for relevant literature. Step 2 - Evaluate and select sources. Step 3 - Identify themes, debates, and gaps. Step 4 - Outline your literature review's structure. Step 5 - Write your literature review.
How to write a review paper
Include this information when writing up the method for your review. 5 Look for previous reviews on the topic. Use them as a springboard for your own review, critiquing the earlier reviews, adding more recently published material, and pos-sibly exploring a different perspective. Exploit their refer-ences as another entry point into the literature.
How to write a review article?
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. ... As is the case with many research articles, general format of a systematic review on a single subject includes sections of ...
Basics of Writing Review Articles
Review articles provide a critical summary of the existing literature to explain the current state of scientific evidence on a particular topic. ... (IMRaD)" format accompanied by title, abstract, key words, and references. The title makes the first introductory and is the most important sentence of the review paper. Like research paper ...
(PDF) Article review writing format, steps, examples and illustration
- 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).
Review Paper Format: How To Write A Review Article Fast
Research Paper, Review Paper Format. Sets the stage with a concise title and a descriptive abstract summarising the review's scope and findings. Lays the groundwork by presenting the research question, justifying the review's importance, and highlighting knowledge gaps. Details the research methods used to select, assess, and synthesise ...
Journal Article Review in APA Style
Journal article reviews start with a header, including citation of the sources being reviewed. This citation is mentioned at the top of the review, following the APA style (refer to the APA style manual for more information). We will need the author's name for the article, title of the article, journal of the published article, volume and ...
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. Thus, the ...
Association of anthropometric measures with all-cause and cause
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if ...
Beyoncé's 'Cowboy Carter': What Critics Are Saying About the Album
A boast she then backs up by spinning a sample of Nancy Sinatra's 'These Boots are Made for Walkin' into quotes from The Beach Boys' 'Good Vibrations,' staking her family's claim to life in ...
25 years of April Fools at DPReview: Digital Photography Review
Check out our sample gallery, and stay tuned for our review in the coming weeks. Mar 20, 2024 61 sample gallery. Samsung S24 Ultra software update to fix camera bug. Since its launch in January, users have complained of a camera bug on Samsung S24 Ultra. In a recent post on its community forum, Samsung acknowledged the bug, noting the company ...
How to Write a Thank You Email After an Interview
And of course, don't forget to review your email for grammar and spelling before sending. This is an example of your communication. Sample Thank You Email Templates. Use the samples below to get started, but make sure you customize them to fit your needs. Sample 1. Subject: Thank you. Hi Genesa,

How to Write an Article Review

Things You Should Know

Preparing to Write Your Review

Writing the Article Review

Sample Article Reviews

Expert Q&A

You Might Also Like

About This Article

Reader Success Stories

Did this article help you?

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples

❓ What Is an Article Review?

📑 Article Review Format

Popular Vs. Scholarly Articles

Article Review vs. Response Paper

✍️ How to Write an Article Review: Step by Step

Read the Article

Summarize the Article

Evaluate the Article

Write the Text

Article Review in APA

Article Review in MLA

✅ Article Review Template

📝 Article Review Examples

📃 Men, Women, & Money

📃 When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism

📃 Sleep Deprivation

✏️ Article Review FAQ

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

What is an Article Review?

Types of Article Reviews

Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

Science Article Review

Critical Review

Article Review Format

How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps

Step 1: Understand the Assignment

Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly

Step 3: Create a Summary

Step 4: Identify the Author's Thesis

Step 5: Evaluate the Author's Evidence and Methodology

Step 6: Analyze the Author's Writing Style

Step 7: Consider the Article's Contribution

Step 8: Write the Introduction

Step 9: Develop the Body of the Review

Step 10: Conclude with a Summary and Evaluation

Article Review Outline

Article Review Examples

Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

Keep reading

How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

Short Description

What Is an Article Review: Grasping the Concept

Types of Review

Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

Science Article Review

Need a Hand From Professionals?

Formatting an Article Review

How Many Publications Should You Review?

Using the APA Format

Using MLA Format

The Pre-Writing Process

Outline and Template

Example of an Article Review

View Our Writer’s Sample Before Crafting Your Own!

Steps for Writing an Article Review

Step 1: Write the Title

Step 2: Cite the Article

Step 3: Article Identification

Step 4: Introduction

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Step 6: Critique It

Step 7: Craft a Conclusion

The Post-Writing Process: Proofread Your Work

Need an Article REVIEW WRITTEN?