The novelty of the work presentation and covering all aspect related to the work

in addition to the technical writhing like the research paper

Please see the following discussion

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_would_I_know_whether_my_paper_is_valuable_enough_to_be_published_in_esteemed_research_journals

Best Regards Ayad Khudhair Al-Nadawi

Osama Rahil

Specifically, I asked about review articles. You know, the one like literature survey. The link that you have posted is useful but it is for publication in general.

Thanks

Essentially the criteria is that the review is "critical and explaining the literature". It must be more than a literature list to be vaulable for a journal to publish. So the review explain e.g. if studies in the field disagree the reason could be that they use different methods.

It must be comprehensive, critical and provide a wisdom to other researchers.

Regards

G

Grzegorz Boczkaj

Henrik Rasmus Andersen

Can I include figures and diagrams from the literatures in the review articles?

A review paper can include a few key figures from the reviewed literature. There is a lot of work in getting permissions from authors and publishers to reprint or redraw figures. This is easier if the authors are authors of some of the most important findings in the area. Generally review papers are better if they are made from established reserchers in a field rather than someone who just began on the subject.

A review paper likely also contain some tables and figures showing the review paper authors overviev of the literature and explanation of mechanisms in the field.

You need to ask publisher (like Elsevier) or owner of some figures (like Sigma Aldrich, if you need some figures from their brochures) for permission.

regards,

GB

An additional suggestion to increase the chance your review paper will be accepted for publication in a good indexed journal (medium-high impact factor) is related to the topic addressed. The topic should be sufficiently new/hot (no or just a few and not exhaustive review papers should be available in scientific literature). If other similar review papers have been already published, you should clearly explain (in the cover letter and in the manuscript) the reason why an additional review paper on this topic is necessary and the main differences compared to the other published review papers.

kind regards

Hi,

I think that a review paper, although it is not supposed to present original results, should present a comprehensive report of the literature, preferably with a special angle. There are qualitative reviews and quantitative ones. The review , by observing all literature in the specific subject, sometime observe a certain trend, unnoticed before, and other interesting details. A qualitative review could even summarize statistical results and reach at some conclusion as to these tests.

yes for some journals

Informative

In addition to novelty aspects the article should address practical applications potential for society in future.

Writing a scientific article is an art. Simple new idea will boost your article to be published in good journals. Supporting your article with references and compare it with previous results of similar topics. Write your article in cleare English language. Use Originpro to plot your figures and so on.

In my opinion the concepts should novelty and practical applications are useful for society, finally explanation of your work

The key criteria for publishing a review article are the topic chosen and its nature, which must be current, topical, relevant, compatible and capable of drawing attention of wide scientific community. The review must be a complete, comprehensive, compact and critical intended to present the present state of knowledge on the topic in an encapsulated form with a critical appraisal. It indeed includes the past, present and future of the subject matter knitting the threads skillfully with wellthought out design, extension of that specific research output, expansion of the horizon (future scope). One important thing to note that most of the critical review articles are 'invited' in nature in case of high impact international journals published by Elsevier, Springer, Taylor & Francis, and the like; anybody can't submit and publish standard review in those journals, as we see in case of scores of substandard journals. Still all interested reserachers can submit any high quality review with apprciable merit and practical implications to any standard journals.

The novelty of the work presentation and covering all aspect related to the work

in addition to the technical writhing like the research paper

I think we can go based on following steps:

1. Find an attractive subject for the review paper which is in demand, other researchers need those information and the work has not been published earlier. Some times journal itself announce what kind of topics they are interested to publish so this is the best option if you have the offer.

2. Check the availability of that specific topic in internet, it shouldn't be available which make our work novel in review paper.

3. Make a frame of our story and content list, so you have a pattern to fill it.

4. Try to make tables for comparisons so firstly we can cover higher number of references and secondly it make it easier and faster for reader to have access to their required information. This kind of tables based on the selected can be different... for example...advantages and disadvantages..

5. And off course we should have background knowledge about the subject so putting all information together we should be able to interpret and relate different publications data and make a useful and informative review article and conclusion.

Following

agree with @Rokhsareh Akbarzadeh and @Jayanta Kumar Biswas

Here is a consensus that a review should be written in a systematic fashion, a notion that is usually followed. In a systematic review with a focused question, the research methods must be clearly described. A ‘methodological filter’ is the best method for identifying the best working style for a research question, and this method reduces the workload when surveying the literature. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The ideal way to synthesize studies is to perform a meta-analysis. In conclusion, when writing a review, it is best to clearly focus on fixed ideas, to use a procedural and critical approach to the literature and to express your findings in an attractive way.

It is a mystery because some journal rejected but some accepted the same article without explanation

Mohd Rafi mohd solleh in your opinion, why they reject it?