There is no secrets, just hard work, a lot of reading, reflecting, analysis, interpretation...and making very coherent system on the chosen topic.

A review should be an accurate and appropriate assessment, the particular quality of which lies in its brevity.

It is easier to write a long review, with detailed reasons and analyses, than to make the essentially positive or negative judgement comprehensible in all brevity.

Hello

The secret is the experience in the subject you are writing

ingrid

Real secrets do not exist in this profession. You have to gain some experience by reading good reviews, and above all you have to learn to acquire, present and balance the decisive facts from a book or a study in a rather short than longer period of time between critical inquiries and the highlighting of the new, contentwise and methodically.

Dear Hein Retter! Dear Ingrid!

Thank you very much for your satisfactory answers.

Best Regards,

Judit

It is important to have all parts of the paper reviewed, not only the literature part, I very appreciate those reviewers that comment the methodology and the results.

Review should be brief and well presented. It should cover all aspects of an idea. Conclude an idea to get new directions for researchers.

Thank you very much for the many answers.

Dear Judit

A review article can be very multifaceted. You should study the issue well to systematize a large amount of information. Write a detailed outline of the review, so it will be easier to integrate the individual sections of the manuscript afterwards. Consult with specialists in this problem.

Try to choose important (interesting) sources, do not regret discarding "unnecessary" - in any case, your knowledge will be complete, it will not be in vain.

In fact, it is quite difficult. I wish you success.

With respect, Roman

Brief and systematic with recent development of the topic is essential for review article.

Thank you Roman and Gopal!

There is no secrets, just hard work, a lot of reading, reflecting, analysis, interpretation...and making very coherent system on the chosen topic.

A good review article has to have an objective either to identify and put together current advances/ findings in scientific knowledge. The reviewer may also aim at identifying significant research gaps / or current research discussions, or review published research and determine the direction the current research is taking . From the reviews, the reviewer may create new research areas of interest. Therefore, the reviewer has to have a certain level of expertise/experience which may help them understand the topic of review. The reviewer’s experience may make it easy to do critical analysis and make a summary reporting on the previously published research.

Thank you for your kind answers.

Follow latest publication for brief Literature Review . Maintain proper reference

and highlight your contribution for this Reviewing .

Thanks for valuable answers.

For good review articles :-

1- a researcher should checks powerful libraries like cochrane library.

2- And to have enough logistic support like fund and materials.

3- Powerful skill in methodology (how to write a research and protocol , study designs , sample size ) and statistics (theoretical and software).

4- communication skills : secondary foreign language mainly English.

5- Check videos & courses of : coursera , edx

6- Time management ability.

1/ On the one hand, it is about the ability to condense complex facts of a text - be it empirical research or theoretical discussion - in such a way that the reader is optimally informed.

2/ If the reviewer is also able to make the crux of the text (or the underlying hypothesis) clear to the reader with a brisk, distinctive style of language - even critical - then the reviewer has done a good job.

I recommended the following article

Article How to write a review article?

Best Regards Judit Molnár

Thank you the interesting and useful answers!

only concerned people read the text.

HI

the people that review the article

the people is with you in te article

the secret is pick up the good magazine

ingrid

Thank you for your brilliant comment, Ingrid.

I

To my opinion, identify a narrow area of research, then identify keywords and check databases. organize all the articles related to that topic, read them and summarize the infomation in a review article and point out the knowldge gap in each section of your review. By summarizing the data is good to analyse them in form of tables and figures.

Take note, nowaday most editors are interested in systematic review, a sort of secondary data analyzed to make an article.

Interesting question and replies. It all comes down to careful selection.

It is necessary to find the apprpriate journal to publish. It is essential to study thoroughly the guidelines for authors and see what fits you.

Following

Thank you for sharing your opinion with me.

Best Regards,

Judit

Its a hard job, like reading a small booklet. Needs very much patience, literature search and dedication..

There are many materials on how to write a systematic literature review. Please, check the following links:

1. How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses: Article How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Con...

2. How to Write a Systematic Review of the Literature: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1937586717747384?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%3dpubmed

3. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a step-by-step guide: https://www.ccace.ed.ac.uk/research/software-resources/systematic-reviews-and-meta-analyses

Some of the best articles are those that have not been published.

Thank you for your kind help. I am glad that people have commented on my question.

Have a nice weekend.

Judit

One of the tricky bits is how to deal with bad published papers in the area of your choice - especially if they are well-cited despite their shortcomings. Should you avoid mentioning them at all, or should you inform the readers about the "bad apples" - in a nice tone, of course. In most every review paper that I have read, been a referee on, or written myself, I tend to avoid mentioning the bad apples, for several reasons, but the main one is that one should not advertise bad papers.

Another, and as an important question, is into which type of categories would you distribute the papers? In some cases you will maybe need to allow one or more papers belong to more than one category - if they cover more ground.

This is why you need to very early on make a plan on categorization, based on careful browsing, and keeping track - on the side - what papers belong to a particular category/ies - and WHY. And be careful to watch out for bad papers -those that appear to be relevant, but actually isn't - those can take time to reject.

Digging up previous reviews would be a help, but do not immediately re-use their style: you should find your own, so you not only know how you can make this work, but also so that afterwards you can actually say that "this is what I had imagined when i started planning it".

The secret lies in the fact that even today, albeit rarely, quite good reviews are written.

Plenty of colleagues appear to think that I'm pretty darn good at writing reviews - but who can tell how one does it? - I haven't even written my own principles down yet! I still don't know, ..., but perhaps I should write a paper on it - if anyone is interested.

I think a lot of researchers would be interested!

Thank you for your excellent answer, Dr. Michael Patriksson.

The most important thing for a review is that it does not remain a secret but is read by many with interest.

So: I shall write such a paper.

The secret of writing a good review article is the depth of knowledge of the author on the topic, his/her innovative writing skill, the questions s/he raises at the beginning and the conclusions s/he draws based upon his/her relevant review/overview of literature.

I completely agree with prof. Behera. The secret of good review article is deep understanding on the concern topic for accurate summation, logical evaluation and suggesting for further research.

There has to be a particular angle from which you approach your review. I agree with Deepak Kumar Behera that more knowledge you have the better such an article will be. However, on the other side, if you have no (deep) knowledge on a subject writing a good review article (and investing enough effort into it) is probably one of the best (and first) things that a young scholar can (and should) do. Reading work of others is what makes us experts on certain subject - not just doing our own experiments. Actually between the two - reading what others have done is more important. And then you get to summarize it. If you know what you want to prove - potentially a missing point - even better. It can lead to identification of a topic for your own PhD research or post-doctoral branch of research.

I agree to Aleksandar. Review papers are a valuable resource for researchers. Unlike most standard research papers, writing a review requires no resources beyond library access, a computer and a great idea. But that does not make writing a good review paper easy; it requires substantial investment of time and thought, and a large dose of creativity. A good review paper not only summarises the current state of knowledge in a particular area, it also synthesises the literature to provide new insights and advance that field of re‐ search. So a good review is not just about looking back and summarising what has been done—it is about synthesising knowledge to show the way forward .

What make a good review paper is by doing a deep dive of the paper in questions.