Medical Writing Writing for Lay Audiences Writing narrative style literature reviews
mew-150pxjpg

Volume 24, Issue 4 - Writing for Lay Audiences

Writing narrative style literature reviews

Abstract

 Reviews provide a synthesis of published literature on a topic and describe its current state-of-art. Reviews in clinical research are thus useful when designing studies or developing practice guidelines. The two standard types of reviews are (a) systematic and (b) non-systematic or narrative review. Unlike systematic reviews that benefit from guidelines such as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, there are no acknowledged guidelines for narrative reviews. I have attempted to define the best practice recommendations for the preparation of a narrative review in clinical research. The quality of a narrative review may be improved by borrowing from the systematic review methodologies that are aimed at reducing bias in the selection of articles for review and employing an effective bibliographic research strategy. The dynamics of narrative review writing, the organizational pattern of the text, the analysis, and the synthesis processes are also discussed.

Download the full article

References

  1. Bolderston A. Writing an effective literature review. J Med Imag Radi Sci 2008;39:86–92.
  2. Green BN, Johnson CD, Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. J Chiropratic Medicine 2006;5:101–117.
  3. Derish PA, Annesley TM. How to writer a rave review. Clin Chem 2011;57:388–391.
  4. Pautasso M. Ten simple rules for writing a literature review. PLoS Comput Biol 2013;9:e1003149.
  5. Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J 2009;26:91–108.
  6. Cronin P, Ryan F, Coughlan M. Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. Br J Nurs 2008;17:38–43.
  7. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000326.
  8. Yuan Y, Hunt HR. Systematic reviews: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:1086–1092.
  9. Collins JA, Fauser CJMB. Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative reviews. Hum Reprod Update 2005;11:103–104.
  10. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097.
  11. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Jun JI, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:224–233.
  12. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 2007;4:e78.
  13. Opiyo N, Shepperd S, Musila N, Allen E, Nyamai R, Fretheim A, et al.. Comparison of alternative evidence summary and presentation formats in clinical guideline development: a mixed-method study. PLoS ONE 2013;8:e55067.
  14. Systematic reviews of health promotion and public health intervention-Cochrane Collaboration Handbook 2005-Unit One: Background to systematic reviews. Available from: http://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au/cochrane
  15. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. BMC Med 2013;11:20.
  16. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standard: realistic syntheses. BMC Med 2013;11:21.
  17. Randolph JJ. A guide to writing the dissertation literature review. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 2009;14:1–13.
  18. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Blackmore H, Kitas GD. Writing a narrative biomedical review: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors. Rheumatol Int 2011;31:1409–1417.
  19. Liumbruno GM, Velati C, Pasqualetti P, Franchini M. How to write a scientific manuscript for publication. Blood Trans 2013;11:217–226.
  20. Murphy CM. Writing an effective review article. J Med Toxicol 2012;8:89–90.
  21. O'Connor TR, Holmquist GP. Algorithm for writing a scientific manuscript. BAMED 2009;37:344–348.
  22. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Preparing for submission. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/manuscript-preparation/preparing-for-submission.html
  23. Guimaraes CA. Structured abstracts. Narrative review. Acta Cir Bras 2006;21:263–268.

Search

Articles

Writing for lay audiences
President's Message
Writing for lay audiences: A challenge for scientists
Patient education accessibility
Legislation and the lay audience: Challenges of communicating benefit and risk in the light of new regulations
Medical writing for two audiences – The RMP public summary
Layperson summaries of clinical trial results: Useful resources in the vacuum of regulatory guidance
Package leaflets for medication in the EU: The possibility of integrating patients’ perspectives in a regulated genre?
What do writers need to know about user testing?
Medical journalism: Another way to write about science
Elements of storytelling in medical journalism
A stroll through the medical blogosphere
Writing narrative style literature reviews
News from the EMA
Profile: An interview with Laura Carolina Collada Ali: On the peculiarities of working for independent research organisations
The Webscout
In the Bookstores
Regulatory Writing
Lingua Franca and Beyond
Gained in Translation
English Grammar and Style
Out On Our Own

Member Login

Links

The Write Stuff Archive Contact Instructions for Authors Feature Article Template (Word) Journal Policies

Editoral Board

Editor-in-Chief:

Co-Editor:

Editorial Manager

  • Victoria White (Tampa, Florida, USA)
show all +

Associate Editors:

Section Editors:

Ad-hoc Editors:

  • Amy Whereat (SpeaktheSpeech Consulting, Asnieres sur Seine, France)

Editor Emeritus: