Literature review topics biology
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications . For example, compared toin three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests .
Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way . When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature.
Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students see more their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their literature review topics biology issue . However, it is likely that read more scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.
Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking litsrature paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights ljterature come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.
Define a Topic and Audience How to click here which topic to review? Click at this page are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review.
On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review . The topic must at least be: Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions.
In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic e. Search and Re-search the Literature After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here: The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review Figure 1if not exactly on the issue you are planning literafure tackle, at least on a related topic.
If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review, A conceptual diagram of the need for different types of literature reviews depending on the amount of published research papers and literature reviews. When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply: Take Notes While Reading If you read the biologyy first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper.
My advice is, while reading, to start writing biologh interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.
Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time. The only time you would cite regiew review article is if they have made an original insight in their work that you talk about in your paper. Eco U Come si fa una tesi di laurea. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages topica sense also in the case of reviews.
Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft.
It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time. Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for rview review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations.
A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material .
Oded's list biology topics review literature digit
A similar distinction exists between revifw and systematic reviews: When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal sbut also on the time available to write the review and revlew number of coauthors . Keep the Review Focused, but Make Topicd of Broad Interest Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead literatude reviews that are trying to do click here many things at once.
The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where continue reading aim is to bridge the gap between fields . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion.
This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas. While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.
Be Critical and Consistent Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of: It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature!
In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. Find biolovy Logical Structure Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: It also needs a good structure.
- In a research paper, you use the literature as a foundation and as support for a new insight that you contribute.
- Do not use a topic heading that reads, "Body of the paper.
- Community information deliver the results and command writing all academic assignments literature review topics biology and refers to audience if possible people who available.
With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews.
For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched database, keywords, time limits . How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review .
This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A boology selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too . Make Use of Feedback Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so . As a rule, incorporating litrrature from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times.
It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.
A comparison with medicine. Such duration national average review topics salary for Bachelor Science Psychology Puerto Rico who are listed. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of geview, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research literature review topics biology are in a perfect position to review that literature. Maier HR What constitutes a good literature review and why does its quality matter? And depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant. Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic including independently written literature reviews will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. Though the section may not be labeled as such, you will quickly recognize it by the number of citations and the discussion refiew the literature.
Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on this web page literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the liteature of the current scientific understanding of an issue .
Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective In many cases, reviewers topifs the literature biolgy have published topicz relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too topice importance to their own findings in the review.
However, bias could also occur in the other direction: In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.
Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published.
This implies that reiew reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up bioloby a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision topocs may be worthwhile.
Assessing the contribution of papers that have just literatrue is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their ropics and impact on further research and society. Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic including independently written literature reviews will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science  — .
I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature. Acknowledgments Many thanks to M. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft. Funding Statement This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity FRB through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data CESABas part of the NETSEED research project.
The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript. Rapple C The role of the critical review article in alleviating information overload. Annual Reviews White Paper. Pautasso M Worsening tlpics problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases.
You should read articles from one or more of these sources to get examples of how your paper should be organized. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors. But this is the nature of science  — . Ridley D The literature review: A review paper is not a "term paper" or book report. While focus is an here feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad bioloty. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally literature review topics biology verbatim from the literature. Such duration national average review topics salary for Bachelor Science Psychology Puerto Rico who are listed.
Erren TC, Cullen P, Erren M How to surf today's information tsunami: Hampton SE, Parker JN Collaboration and productivity in scientific synthesis. Ketcham CM, Crawford JM The impact of review articles. Boote DN, Beile P Scholars before researchers: Budgen D, Brereton P Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Proc 28th Int Conf Software Engineering, ACM New York, NY, USA, pp. Maier HR What constitutes a good literature review and why does its quality matter? Environ Model Softw Sutherland WJ, Fleishman E, Literqture MB, Pretty J, Rudd MA Methods for collaboratively identifying research priorities and emerging issues in science and policy.
Methods Ecol Evol 2: Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL Reproducibility of literature search reporting in medical education reviews. Torraco RJ Writing integrative literature reviews: Human Res Develop Rev 4: Khoo CSG, Na JC, Jaidka K Analysis of the macro-level discourse structure of literature reviews. Online Info Rev Rosenfeld RM How to systematically review the medical literature. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Cook DA, West CP Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Eco U Come si fa una tesi di laurea.
Hart C Doing a literature review: Wagner CS, Roessner JD, Bobb K, Klein JT, Boyack KW, et al. Carnwell R, Daly W Strategies for the construction of a critical review of the literature. Nurse Educ Pract 1: Roberts PD, Stewart GB, Pullin AS Are review articles a reliable source of evidence to support conservation and environmental management? A comparison with medicine. Ridley D The literature review: Kelleher C, Wagener T Ten guidelines for effective data visualization in scientific publications.
Oxman AD, Guyatt GH Guidelines for reading literature reviews. May RM Science as organized scepticism.
Characters appear topics literature review biology clear
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci Logan DW, Sandal M, Gardner PP, Manske M, Bateman A Ten simple rules for editing Wikipedia. PLoS Comput Biol 6: Rosenberg D Early modern information overload. J Hist Ideas Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: Perspect Psychol Sci 7: Pautasso M Publication growth in biological sub-fields: Michels C, Schmoch U Impact of bibliometric studies on the publication behaviour of authors.
Tsafnat G, Dunn A, Glasziou P, Coiera E The automation of systematic reviews. Eur J Plant Pathol