article review outline

article review outline

The Importance of Article Reviews

1. Introduction

This is the first and most crucial step for an article review. Read the article in its entirety without making any notations. This step is often skipped, which is very unfortunate because making neat notations throughout the written text will increase your rate of understanding the material. After reading the article, make an outline of the article based on its structure, and write notes based on different parts of the article. This step is also very helpful, as an outline can simplify and speed up the understanding process.

Article reviews are a common school assignment where students are required to familiarize themselves with the work of experts in a certain field. Article reviews present more than just an opinion. Students must do a thorough analysis of the article, considering the style in which the article is written. With this in mind, writing the article review might become a very hard and challenging task for students. High school and college students may find it especially tough, as writing book and article reviews is something they have not done before.

Article reviews have become an efficient way for students to evaluate their knowledge of a topic. An article review is a piece of writing where you summarize and assess someone else’s article. The goal of the preparatory assignments is to give you experience in reading primary literature (a science article reporting on an experiment or a theory) and interpreting the article. Here are the steps for doing an article review well.

2. Summary of the Article

Leotsakos et al. have identified key elements through their systematic review. These are factors that relate to the practice of hand hygiene and may perhaps influence compliance. They can be divided into internal and external elements and can be examined using a model from behavioural sciences. This model lays out the causal pathway from abstract social forces to compliance with specific hygiene practices. The model can be tested using experimental interventions. Any research involving this may have a considerable impact on the quality of hand hygiene interventions. Through identification of the key factors on the topic, Leotsakos et al. believe that it may be easier to plan strategies in both the short and long term. These methods may involve more RCTs, use varied samples of different healthcare worker populations, and encourage cooperation with behavioural and social scientists.

The 2 studies set to review the current literature and identify useful interventions have done so in 2 slightly different ways. The study by Macher et al. is a narrative review of 17 articles. The article by Leotsakos et al. represents a systematic review of the literature based on the findings of the first study; a comprehensive review of literature regarding hand hygiene (HH) practices and relevant human behavioural and environmental factors to identify factors that are key to understanding the dynamics of HH behaviour in healthcare facilities. Both studies showed that the problems of translating theory to practice, and getting healthcare workers to comply with hand hygiene practices have been ongoing for some time, and that improvement is needed. Statistics have shown that HCW’s hand hygiene compliance may be as low as 8% and as high as 80%.

The article reviews discuss how best to implement evidence-based practice regarding hand hygiene. In addition, the authors have reviewed many studies regarding hand hygiene and the best ways to promote its use. The purpose of the reviews has been to identify useful interventions and to develop a clear agenda for future research in this area.

Summary of the article reviews

Without the article and the comments.

3. Critical Analysis of the Article

Analysis is the process of evaluating the article, that is, summarizing, describing, and critically evaluating it. The critical evaluation done at the ‘describe’ stage often results in a fair amount of ‘negative’ analysis. The ‘negative’ analysis is the examining the article based on what the writer should have included but did not. It is not valueless in that often the reason the article is bad is because the writer has not understood the point of his/her research or the reader has unrealistic expectations. The first thing to consider when beginning a critical analysis is to read over the entire article/story. Generally, this should be done more than once. During the first reading, the general idea of the article’s content should be made. This should include the research or argument, as well as the conclusions, and it should also include the language used. This provides the basis for the next step which is to break up the article into a ‘beginning’, ‘middle’, and ‘end’, because it is in these three parts that the content of the article is summarized. During the second reading, the points that have been noted should then be checked in a more detailed manner, and specific points written throughout the article so as to maintain continuity in analysis. It is during these detailed notes that the analysis is written, for it is the points that have been noted down that are discussed in the critical evaluation.

4. Implications and Applications

Finally, it must be considered that the resources available to conduct research are not infinite. Research funding is a finite albeit highly valuable commodity and therefore it is essential to utilize it in the most efficient manner. Implementation of research into policy or practice is often dependent on the resources that interpret its findings. By guiding the consumers of research articles towards the most valid and relevant information, article reviews can play a crucial role in maximizing the utility of research findings.

Furthermore, research is no longer the sole venture of academics. As science and technology progress, greater connectivity and a burgeoning global community have led to research being conducted in a variety of settings and experienced by an array of stakeholders. This may include policymakers, educators, and healthcare workers amongst others. Article reviews are essential in catering for the diverse audience of modern research by providing a more succinct and understandable version of an article and analyzing its relevance to various sectors.

The emphasis placed upon the necessity for article reviews is largely due to the shifting dynamic of scientific inquiry. Whereas previously, little heed was paid to the methodology and acquiring of results, these factors are now recognized as essential. Publishing is no longer an end-point in research, but rather a node along the way. Sharing of information is crucial in order to both receive and expand upon current knowledge, and to achieve this, information must be comprehensible and above all readily available. Herein lies one of the major applications of article reviews. By assessing the quality and pertinence of research articles, reviewers facilitate the dissemination of high-quality information, allowing for it to reach a wider and more diverse audience.

5. Conclusion

Provided the abstract is less than 250 words, it is usually best to begin with a short citation of the article, but using title and authors in quotation marks. Begin with a date and the entire citation. He should follow the citation by noting the purpose of the review and what issue it addresses. The review should be prefaced with the aforementioned background information. A theoretical framework, if it can be succinctly distributed, is very important. The review should begin with the analysis and finally move into conclusions. Sometimes it is useful to divide the review with small paragraphs entitled by an analytic heading. This is a list of the bare minimum, providing the summary has become a second nature task. A summary seeking to explicate something, or discussion of method seldom these days needs to be convinced it is necessary to have.

Article reviews can prove to be very challenging. Nevertheless, the challenging of article reviews serves as a way for the reviewer to grasp a better understanding of the topic in which the article is about. Due to the fact that the review is being written for an audience familiar with the article being reviewed, the reviewer’s first task is to provide a summary of the article. This should be done using the reviewer’s own words. This means that the reviewer will not find it necessary to quote or paraphrase from the article.

An article review is written for an audience who is knowledgeable in the subject matter instead of a general audience. When writing an article review, it is often assumed that the reader has a better understanding of the subject matter being addressed than the writer. The process of writing an article review will go faster if the author has taken the time to read the article several times in order to grasp its overall content. He should then be able to make a mental outline of the article in order to come up with a title for his review.

The purpose of an article review is to provide a summary and evaluation of a piece of writing. When the process of review moves from the back to the front of the bar, from the desk of a hospital resident to the light of international interest, several elements are usually noted. Included to address are the implications for the field of health and health care and the nature of the particular bar where the event took place.

Despite the growing importance of science and technology, the humanities remain vital to continued human culture. Making the task of writing an article review even more crucial. This serves as a resource to help aid students in the process of writing an article review and assists in understanding article review and its importance.