Or simply I can suggest idea and go on writing and submitting to suitable journal? and what about the novelty and choosing the topic in review article writing?
Until and unless you are a renowned worker, do not expect invitation from editors of good journals. However, you must be getting requests from many online journals repeatedly throughout the year. Most of them have no proper review system and ask for processing fees. So I suggest to consider only standard journals and do not wait for such request.
One can always write a review article and publish in a suitable journal. In fact any research generally starts with a review of literature to what all happend and who did what etc. This is the starting point to get hooked to review writing and one can improve upon and do a wonderful job and publish it will help others as well. Best wishes
Hi, Heba
I think you can write a review article without an invitation by Journal editors, but actually this depend on deep understanding and reading for your topic. I agree with Subir Bandyopadhyay you have to pay attention for journals invitations and choose standard and high quality journals. The novelty is most important thing that make your paper very strong and increases its acceptance, on this point you have to collect informations in your topic as you can and should be most recent publications, and spend more time to get the gape of research in specific topic (significance of your research).
You can refer to the following files:
http://libguides.eastern.edu/c.php?g=116063&p=756240
Many Thanks to Subir, Vasulu and Mohammed,
Your opinions are really helpful for me and I will start following it to publish a new review article
If you have an idea about a specific theme, just write it. Then, look for a journal. Writing review articles is one of the manners you can enter to the world of the scientific literature. With time, and hard work, you will gain experience and get better manuscripts.
Many of the journals, particularly prestigious journals, normally do not accept [narrative] review articles, even from renown authors. They invite one to write a narrative review. But, these journals clearly mention in their Web site their policy. For some journals, however, you can contact the editor BEFORE you start writing a review. You should contact the editor and explain your points, who you are and why you think that journal is appropriate for your review. For systematic reviews, there is no limitation. No matter who you are, you can submit a systematic review to any journal you like.
Thanks Farrokh, but what you mean by systematic review and what is the difference between it and review article?
Heba:
A narrative review just reflects the opinion of its author about a general topic. The author is free to choose references (s)he deems suitable. Therefore, two authors may write two very different narrative reviews on the same topic. However, a systematic review is "systematic." It has a clear reproducible methodology describing what databases were searched, when the search was conducted, what keywords were selected and how they were used, how many articles were retrieved and how the were evaluated, etc. A systematic review usually addresses a specific question, and because it is reproducible, even if two independent authors perform a systematic review, they usually come to the same conclusion. The structure is more similar to that of an original article than a narrative review.
Dear Anirban,
Thanks so much for you. It is realy fruitful discussion and so me I learnt a lot from it.
Many thanks to all friends for their good sharing.
My best wishes with other good discussions.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Academic Writing