It seems that the review papers are recently more facilitated by many of journals and many of researchers started to work on the review projects or pay more attention to participate in the projects, instead to the original ones. This is because of easily available data for the review researches compared to the original researches or lab researches, without risks of the original researches and very cost-less. More over the more citation number of review papers compared to the original researches purged the journals and researchers to move toward the review researches for a reason of increasing H index or similar indexes. Now, the question is that, what are the opportunities and challenges of the increased number of the review researches? May it lead to pale of the original researches? Are there any rules for controlling the potential threats?
I agree with your opinion, But in an every novel work, there is some loop in order to improve performance or analysis in broader sense.Becuase of that, review of the paper comes under various subjects, applications...........
Thank you Khalid. Of course it is good in turn, however how the preference of the original works can be kept?
Dear Rohollah,
If you mean a systematic review article, I do agree with you; nowadays you can see a lot of these kinds of papers and anyone is allowed to publish them without having only one published article. However, when it comes to narrative review articles, it is not an easy job to publish one. And, journals usually have some rules for it; for instance, you should be completely sophisticated in your area of expertise and you have already published several articles in the title about which you have planed to prepare a narrative review article. Or journal may ask famous researchers or professors to write a narrative review manuscript. All in all, in some countries researchers find it easy to publish systematic and meta-analysis reviews instead of original ones.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Citations