The review paper I wish to cite is not a review of the topic I am writing on. It just has some relevant information I would like to use.
Yes. Feel free to quote or paraphrase with citation. E.g.:
"Microbiome literature was broadly reviewed by BIGNAME et al (2000), but patient allergies were not considered in depth or specifically reviewed. The current paper reviews adverse reactions to probiotics."
Yes. Feel free to quote or paraphrase with citation. E.g.:
"Microbiome literature was broadly reviewed by BIGNAME et al (2000), but patient allergies were not considered in depth or specifically reviewed. The current paper reviews adverse reactions to probiotics."
When writing a review paper, is it ethical to use another review paper as one of your references?
I think is fine as long as the review paper that you intend to cite is somehow related / relevant / connected to your paper in terms of certain substance even though it is on different topic e.g. you try to borrow the concept, idea, approach etc.
Recommended posts dear Dr. Ian Kennedy and Dr. Han Ping Fung, I do agree with your points of view.
Regards, Emad
There is no binding in what kind of paper you want to use unless you cite that properly.
It is fine...as long as you cite the paper from where you are using some relevant information....
Yes, .... I do not think there is a problem 'it is support for research
The only un-ethical thing one can do in such cases would be to appropriate someone else's words, data, findings, ideas, and presenting them as her own. As it holds in every other cases.
You may like to explore the concept of meta-review if you have several review articles to review. When reviewing review articles I have seen many scholars struggle between the following two choices.
(1) Find original articles for citations
(2) Use review articles and use phrases like "cited in" when referring to original articles.
Both are ethical but the preference may vary between individuals, disciplinary traditions, and ease to assessing the original references.
Mostly it is advisable to use original papers rather than a review once. But it is possible to use a review paper as a reference if you don't have access for the origina
Sometimes, review papers are even more valuable because they synthetize a large amount of informations that are discussed. As long as you cite the article, it is completely fine.
As everyone else said this is fine as long as you refer to the paper properly, and also make it obvious in the text which ideas and claims you have taken from the review paper.
I usually ask my students to read the original papers/books that are the core literature in their field, but when they discuss adjacent fields or ideas it is fine to rely on review papers and meta-reviews.
Still, whenever possible try to engage with ideas and results first-hand. Unless you're writing a meta-review.
It should be appropriate to cite a review article as long as it is peer reviewed and relevant for your topic or argument.
Dr. J. Osei
discussions, arguments and comparisms in review papers makes them more interesting and highly educative than even the original paper. as such, I think there is nothing wrong with you citing such a paper.
Yes, as long as you state that the ideas or opinions were from another review paper.
@Istvan Zoltan Zardai - excellent advice.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Writing