Abstract
Literature review articles provide a valuable mechanism for remaining informed amidst an ever-increasing body of scientific work. Condensing current advances into this disseminatable form is a critical activity for any research trainee. To systematize this multifaceted process, we present the “why, when, who, what, how, and where” of composing a literature review article. Commentaries include selection of a review topic, conducting modern literature searches using online databases, stepwise strategies for manuscript drafting, and prevention of plagiarism. The current work provides structures and guidance for this fundamental effort which can establish the basis for a trainee’s development of original research objectives.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Falagas, M. E., E. I. Pitsouni, G. A. Malietzis, and G. Pappas. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J. 22:338–342, 2008.
Hoq, K. M. G. Information overload: causes, consequences and remedies-a study. Philos. Prog. 55:49–68, 2014.
Lahiry, S. and R. Sinha. Creativity is intelligence having fun, originality an undetected plagiarism! Indian J. Dermatol. Venereol. Leprol.. In Press, 4:150. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdvl.IJDVL_71_18.
Martin, E. R. The role of librarians in data science: a call to action. J. Escience Librariansh. 4:e1092, 2016.
McKeever, L., V. Nguyen, S. J. Peterson, S. Gomez-Perez, and C. Braunschweig. Demystifying the search button: a comprehensive PubMed search strategy for performing an exhaustive literature review. J. Parenter. Enteral Nutr. 39:622–635, 2015.
Moher, D., L. Shamseer, M. Clarke, D. Ghersi, A. Liberati, M. Petticrew, P. Shekelle, and L. A. Stewart. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst. Rev. 4:1, 2015.
National Institutes of Health Office of Intramural Research. General guidelines for authorship contributions. https://oir.nih.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/sourcebook/documents/ethical_conduct/guidelines-authorship_contributions.pdf.
Otfinowski, R., and M. Silva-Opps. Writing toward a scientific identity: shifting from prescriptive to reflective writing in undergraduate biology. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 45:19–23, 2015.
Pautasso, M. Ten. Simple rules for writing a literature review. PLoS Comput. Biol. 9:e1003149, 2013.
Shkodkina, Y. M., and D. Pakauskas. Comparative analysis of plagiarism detection systems. Bus. Ethics Leadersh. 1:27–35, 2017.
Wright, T. M., J. A. Buckwalter, and W. C. Hayes. Writing for the Journal of Orthopaedic Research. J. Orthop. Res. 17:459–466, 1999.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge support by the National Institutes of Health (P41 EB023833) towards the establishment of the Center for Engineering Complex Tissues and its educational programs. G.L.K. is supported by the Robert and Janice McNair Foundation MD/PhD Student Scholar Program. The authors gratefully acknowledge Mani Diba for advising “how” to engage in systematic literature searches and stepwise drafting processes, and we thank Alexander M. Tatara for the “draft skeleton” concept.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Associate Editor Jane Grande-Allen oversaw the review of this article.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koons, G.L., Schenke-Layland, K. & Mikos, A.G. Why, When, Who, What, How, and Where for Trainees Writing Literature Review Articles. Ann Biomed Eng 47, 2334–2340 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-019-02290-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-019-02290-5