3.8 Article

WRITING NARRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEWS FOR PEER-REVIEWED JOURNALS: SECRETS OF THE TRADE

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHIROPRACTIC MEDICINE
Volume 5, Issue 3, Pages 101-117

Publisher

ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6

Keywords

Review Literature; Authorship; Peer Review; research; Manuscripts; Metaanalysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To describe and discuss the process used to write a narrative review of the literature for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Publication of narrative overviews of the literature should be standardized to increase their objectivity. Background: In the past decade numerous changes in research methodology pertaining to reviews of the literature have occurred. These changes necessitate authors of review articles to be familiar with current standards in the publication process. Methods: Narrative overview of the literature synthesizing the findings of literature retrieved from searches of computerized databases, hand searches, and authoritative texts. Discussion: An overview of the use of three types of reviews of the literature is presented. Step by step instructions for how to conduct and write a narrative overview utilizing a 'best-evidence synthesis' approach are discussed, starting with appropriate preparatory work and ending with how to create proper illustrations. Several resources for creating reviews of the literature are presented and a narrative overview critical appraisal worksheet is included. A bibliography of other useful reading is presented in an appendix. Conclusion: Narrative overviews can be a valuable contribution to the literature if prepared properly. New and experienced authors wishing to write a narrative overview should find this article useful in constructing such a paper and carrying out the research process. It is hoped that this article will stimulate scholarly dialog amongst colleagues about this research design and other complex literature review methods.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available