Specifies the number of studies evaluated orselected
Steps, and targets of constructing a good review article are listed in Table 3 . To write a good review article the items in Table 3 should be implemented step by step. [ 11 – 13 ]
Steps of a systematic review
Formulation of researchable questions | Select answerable questions |
Disclosure of studies | Databases, and key words |
Evaluation of its quality | Quality criteria during selection of studies |
Synthesis | Methods interpretation, and synthesis of outcomes |
It might be helpful to divide the research question into components. The most prevalently used format for questions related to the treatment is PICO (P - Patient, Problem or Population; I-Intervention; C-appropriate Comparisons, and O-Outcome measures) procedure. For example In female patients (P) with stress urinary incontinence, comparisons (C) between transobturator, and retropubic midurethral tension-free band surgery (I) as for patients’ satisfaction (O).
In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.
Ideally, research methods, investigated databases, and key words should be described in the final report. Different databases are used dependent on the topic analyzed. In most of the clinical topics, Medline should be surveyed. However searching through Embase and CINAHL can be also appropriate.
While determining appropriate terms for surveying, PICO elements of the issue to be sought may guide the process. Since in general we are interested in more than one outcome, P, and I can be key elements. In this case we should think about synonyms of P, and I elements, and combine them with a conjunction AND.
One method which might alleviate the workload of surveying process is “methodological filter” which aims to find the best investigation method for each research question. A good example of this method can be found in PubMed interface of Medline. The Clinical Queries tool offers empirically developed filters for five different inquiries as guidelines for etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or clinical prediction.
As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible. To achieve this goal you should know the best possible evidence for each type of question The first component of the quality is its general planning/design of the study. General planning/design of a cohort study, a case series or normal study demonstrates variations.
A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4 . However this hierarchy is only a first step. After you find good quality research articles, you won’t need to read all the rest of other articles which saves you tons of time. [ 14 ]
Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question
I | Systematic review of Level II studies | Systematic review of Level II studies | Systematic review of Level II studies | Systematic review of Level II studies |
II | Randomized controlled study | Crross-sectional study in consecutive patients | Initial cohort study | Prospective cohort study |
III | One of the following: Non-randomized experimental study (ie. controlled pre-, and post-test intervention study) Comparative studies with concurrent control groups (observational study) (ie. cohort study, case-control study) | One of the following: Cross-sectional study in non-consecutive case series; diagnostic case-control study | One of the following: Untreated control group patients in a randomized controlled study, integrated cohort study | One of the following: Retrospective cohort study, case-control study (Note: these are most prevalently used types of etiological studies; for other alternatives, and interventional studies see Level III |
IV | Case series | Case series | Case series or cohort studies with patients at different stages of their disease states |
Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. In this case a solution should be found. However it is risky to make a decision based on the votes of absolute majority. Indeed, a well-performed large scale study, and a weakly designed one are weighed on the same scale. Therefore, ideally a meta-analysis should be performed to solve apparent differences. Ideally, first of all, one should be focused on the largest, and higher quality study, then other studies should be compared with this basic study.
In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1) Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective. 2) Research articles in the literature should be approached with a methodological, and critical attitude and 3) finally data should be explained in an attractive way.
Journal articles are the academic's stock in trade, t he basic means of communicating research findings to an audience of one’s peers. That holds true across the disciplinary spectrum, so no matter where you land as a concentrator, you can expect to rely on them heavily.
Regardless of the discipline, moreover, journal articles perform an important knowledge-updating function .
Textbooks and handbooks and manuals will have a secondary function for chemists and physicists and biologists, of course. But in the sciences, articles are the standard and preferred publication form.
In the social sciences and humanities , where knowledge develops a little less rapidly or is driven less by issues of time-sensitivity , journal articles and books are more often used together.
Not all important and influential ideas warrant book-length studies, and some inquiry is just better suited to the size and scope and concentrated discussion that the article format offers.
Journal articles sometimes just present the most appropriate solution for communicating findings or making a convincing argument. A 20-page article may perfectly fit a researcher's needs. Sustaining that argument for 200 pages might be unnecessary -- or impossible.
The quality of a research article and the legitimacy of its findings are verified by other scholars, prior to publication, through a rigorous evaluation method called peer-review . This seal of approval by other scholars doesn't mean that an article is the best, or truest, or last word on a topic. If that were the case, research on lots of things would cease. Peer review simply means other experts believe the methods, the evidence, the conclusions of an article have met important standards of legitimacy, reliability, and intellectual honesty.
Searching the journal literature is part of being a responsible researcher at any level: professor, grad student, concentrator, first-year. Knowing why academic articles matter will help you make good decisions about what you find -- and what you choose to rely on in your work.
Think of journal articles as the way you tap into the ongoing scholarly conversation , as a way of testing the currency of a finding, analysis, or argumentative position, and a way of bolstering the authority (or plausibility) of explanations you'll offer in the papers and projects you'll complete at Harvard.
Except where otherwise noted, this work is subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , which allows anyone to share and adapt our material as long as proper attribution is given. For details and exceptions, see the Harvard Library Copyright Policy ©2021 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College.
Teachings Buddhism
An essay and practice on embodiment
Whether you’re a Buddhist practitioner, a meditator, someone interested in the topic, or you just happened upon this writing, I believe I can make the case that recollecting the Buddha holds value for you.
Often, recollecting the Buddha gets relegated to a purely religious practice. But when we really look at the meaning and driving force behind it, it’s not only religious; it’s simply a way to remember a potential we all have within.
Basically, remembering or recollecting the Buddha is a way to remember our own potential for awakening and freedom.
I want you to do a quick exercise or visualization: When you think of the Buddha, whether it’s a beautiful image, a statue, a teaching, or whatever pops into your mind, what happens to you? What happens to your energy, your body, and your mind?
Remembering or recollecting the Buddha is a way to remember our own potential for awakening and freedom
What I tend to notice in myself, and what others often share with me, is that they feel a sense of peace. For most of us, the Buddha represents simplicity, peace, and maybe even calmness. For those who have studied the dharma, he is also a symbol of awakening and our own potential for inner freedom. I understand that some people may have different experiences when they imagine the Buddha. While that’s true, I believe that, for most of us, the image or symbol of the Buddha represents something peaceful, something we desire.
After all, our lives are often stressful. We struggle with overwhelm, and if we’re honest, we don’t always know how to deal with what comes up. The Buddha recognized this as part of life, and I believe the symbol of the Buddha represents someone who resolved that to some degree. Buddhists believe he resolved it completely, meaning he resolved the fundamental stress of existence.
The actual resolution itself, or awakening, is a vast topic with numerous teachings and a whole path dedicated to it. However, when we remember or recollect the Buddha, it’s a powerful symbol of resolution and reminder of our own inner potential.
Let’s delve deeper into the meaning of the word “Buddha.” The Tibetan word for Buddha is “Sangye,” which can be broken down into two parts, representing two aspects of what it means to be awakened.
The first part, “sang,” means “to purify” or “cleanse.” So, literally, it means that a Buddha’s consciousness has been purified or clarified, removing confusion, stress, and suffering. This also includes destructive habitual patterns and emotions.
The second part, “gye,” is a bit more nuanced. It means “expansion” or “blossoming.” When we remove confusion and suffering, it’s not that we’re left with nothing. Instead, all enlightened qualities are fully bloomed, such as unconditional compassion, love, and kindness. So a Buddha, having cleared their confusion, has expanded into boundless compassion, love, and activity that can benefit others in extremely profound ways.
When we recollect or remember the Buddha, we’re not just recalling the achievements of a revered historical figure. We’re also remembering that many beings have awakened throughout history, across various cultures and life circumstances. This signifies that awakening is not something reserved for a select few; it’s a potential within us all.
By recollecting the Buddha, we tap into this potential and become inspired to work on ourselves. We learn from the dharma, meditate, and strive to live differently. We remember that we don’t have to settle for suffering or stagnation. We can change for the better.
Ultimately, recollecting the Buddha is about remembering our most profound potential, the potential to transform ourselves and have a lasting and meaningful impact on the world around us.
This powerful practice transcends religious boundaries; anyone can benefit from understanding the symbol and historical significance of the Buddha, and realizing that this word extends beyond one person to encompass the potential within all of our minds.
Recollecting the Buddha is about remembering our most profound potential, the potential to transform ourselves and have a lasting and meaningful impact on the world around us.
In Mahayana Buddhism, the concept of buddhanature emphasizes that every being possesses the inherent potential for awakening. Beneath the surface of our perceived limitations, suffering, and unhappiness lies a pure, clarified nature. By connecting with this essence, we can blossom into limitless compassion, love, and skillful action, interacting with others and the world in a more free, open, and fluid way.
Here’s a simple embodiment practice you can try on your own.
May this exercise open a world of fresh and new possibilities for you.
This article was adapted from a piece that originally appeared on Scott Tusa’s blog .
Thank you for subscribing to Tricycle! As a nonprofit, we depend on readers like you to keep Buddhist teachings and practices widely available.
Subscribe now to read this article and get immediate access to everything else.
Already a subscriber? Log in .
When we recollect the Buddha, we become the Buddha, we “do” the Buddha, here, now, as only we can (We do the same thing when we recollect the Christ, and the Prophet). We incarnate the Buddha in our own life when we “do it like the Buddha would do it if the Buddha were me, right here, right now.” We can live in ways each day that bring blessing and grace to life in our life. When I commune with my statue of the seated Buddha, his serenity and tranquility become my serenity, my tranquility, and I can step back into may life and do there what needs to be done the way the Buddha might do it, and then I can drop back into his serenity and tranquility, until I step back into my life, and back and forth it goes…
Replying as
Already a subscriber? Log In
Tricycle is more than a magazine.
Subscribe for access to video teachings, monthly films, e-books, and our 30-year archive.
The latest from tricycle to your inbox and more.
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
Would you like to sign up for our other mailing lists?
By continuing, you agree to Tricycle’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service .
Tricycle is a nonprofit that depends on reader support.
A weekly look at the most interesting essays on the internet. In the latest edition, we spotlight pieces about Bell Labs, Indonesia’s pluralism, and white bread.
Sign up for Semafor Flagship: The daily global news briefing you can trust. Read it now .
The London Review of Substacks is a weekly feature in Flagship, Semafor’s daily global newsletter.
Ringing the bell
“To students of technological progress, Bell Labs is a giant.” So notes Brian Potter in Construction Physics, pointing to a dizzying array of technological breakthroughs from AT&T’s research arm, and an astonishing number of Nobel and Turing prizes awarded to its scientists. Perhaps not surprisingly, then, policymakers, writers, and executives often discuss the possibility of establishing a contemporary equivalent. “Unfortunately,” Potter warns, “the conditions that made Bell Labs so successful were highly historically contingent and not the sort of thing that could be deliberately recreated.”
It was, for one, part of a huge, government-sanctioned monopoly, giving it a long-term outlook and a sprawling list of credible research interests that few R&D departments can avail of today. The latter point — a wide array of experts in varying fields — became self-reinforcing, because those scientists could collaborate across disciplines. Plainly, it was also lucky. Yet, Potter argues, “ the world that Bell Labs thrived in no longer exists .” It was, he continues, “not only… a product of unique historical circumstances, but unique technological circumstances.”
Out of the shadows
Among Indonesia’s most culturally significant performances is wayang kulit, a form of shadow puppetry in which figures are cut from raw buffalo hide and which can last for upwards of eight hours. That, in itself, is perhaps unremarkable: Plenty of countries have their own form of storytelling, each with their own idiosyncrasies. Yet Indonesia’s is unusual not only in that wayang kulit recounts the Mahabharata and Ramayana, two Hindu epics, in a majority Muslim nation — but that wayang kulit is repeatedly used by Muslim political parties and organizations to further their own goals and narratives.
As the journalist Pallavi Aiyar notes, wayang kulit is believed to have been used by Islamic scholars who first began spreading Islam on the island of Java, now part of modern-day Indonesia, as well as by Christian missionaries, along with the country’s independence hero Sukarno and the military dictator Suharto. Even now, huge crowds often attend: “To put this in perspective,” Aiyar writes, “one must imagine thousands of folk in England showing up to listen to an eight-hour long rendition of a Homeric epic in ancient Greek .” Wayang kulit is, she concludes, “the most tangible manifestation of Indonesia’s pluralism.”
Any way you slice it
Sliced bread has long existed, but its mechanization and increased scale in the 20th century increased its prevalence: Even in diverse cities like London today, “for every miche, roti, baozi, challah, injera, flatbread and focaccia, there are at least as many loaves of plain white,” Isaac Rangaswami writes in Vittles. As a result, sliced, white bread can seem plain, boring, mainstream. Yet that need not be so.
Rangaswami explores the multitude of ways London’s restaurants and bakeries manipulate white bread beyond simply making sandwiches: from fried slices at classic “greasy spoons” like E Pellicci to bread pakoras at Gujarati restaurants; kaya toast at Southeast Asian joints to prawn toast at Chinese takeaways; Welsh rarebit at upscale eateries to bread and butter pudding at the iconic Regency Cafe — a favorite of Flagship’s Prashant. All of them, Rangaswami writes, “ are the very definition of making something out of nothing .”
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Step 1: Define the right organization for your review. Knowing the future setup of your paper will help you define how you should read the article. Here are the steps to follow: Summarize the article — seek out the main points, ideas, claims, and general information presented in the article.
3. Identify the article. Start your review by referring to the title and author of the article, the title of the journal, and the year of publication in the first paragraph. For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest.
Here is a basic, detailed outline for an article review you should be aware of as a pre-writing process if you are wondering how to write an article review. Introduction. Introduce the article that you are reviewing (author name, publication date, title, etc.) Now provide an overview of the article's main topic.
To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work-deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole. Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain ...
2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification. 3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review's introduction, briefly ...
Read the Article Thoroughly. The first step in writing an article review is to read the article carefully and thoroughly. This may seem obvious, but it is crucial to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the work before attempting to critique it. During the initial reading, focus on grasping the main arguments, key points, and the overall ...
Step 4: Make an Introduction. In your introduction, provide a brief overview of the title's subject and purpose. Capture the reader's attention and clearly state your thesis or main point related to the title. For instance, you might start your article review template like this.
Synthesize Information: Go beyond summarizing sources to draw new insights and perspectives. Write Clearly and Concisely: Ensure that your essay is well-structured, with clear transitions and a logical flow of ideas. Review and Refine: Revise your essay for clarity, coherence, and grammatical accuracy.
How to Write an Article Review That Stands Out. An article review is a critical assessment that aims to expand one's knowledge by evaluating the original author's research. According to statistical research, 5.14 million research papers are published every year, including short surveys, article reviews, and conference proceedings.
For an article review, your task is to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. You are being asked to make judgments, positive or negative, about the content of the article. The criteria you follow to do this will vary based upon your particular academic discipline and the parameters of your ...
Review titles usually have two parts. The first part reveals the research topic. The second part (after the colon) specifies the type of review. Such a title helps readers to immediately identify the type of publication when searching. The number of sources in the review depends on how much you cover the topic.
Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly. Begin by thoroughly reading the article. Take notes on key points, arguments, and evidence presented by the author. Understand the author's main thesis and the context in which the article was written.
Article Review vs. Response Paper . Now, let's consider the difference between an article review and a response paper: If you're assigned to critique a scholarly article, you will need to compose an article review.; If your subject of analysis is a popular article, you can respond to it with a well-crafted response paper.; The reason for such distinctions is the quality and structure of ...
What is an Article Review? In simple terms, an article review essay is like a summary and evaluation of another professional or expert's work. It may also be referred to as a literature review that includes an outline of the most recent research on the subject, or a critical review that focuses on a specific article with smaller scope.
Course Number Instructor's Name Your Name The titles of the readings under review. Part 1 (about 1-2 pages) • state a question you wish to answer or a theme you wish to address using the readings. • state your answer to the question or conclusion about the theme. • give a road-map for how you are going to make that argument. Part 2 ...
Writing an article CRITIQUE A critique asks you to evaluate an article and the author's argument. You will need to look critically at what the author is claiming, evaluate the research methods, and look for possible problems with, or applications of, the researcher's claims.
Published on: March 22, 2024. This guide aims to demystify the review paper format, presenting practical tips to help you accelerate the writing process. From understanding the structure to synthesising literature effectively, we'll explore how to create a compelling review article swiftly, ensuring your work is both impactful and timely.
Identifying Main Arguments and Supporting Evidence. First, skim the title, abstract, headings, and conclusion. This gives you an overview of the article's main points and structure. Then, look for the thesis statement - the main argument the author is making. After that, identify topic sentences in each paragraph.
Actions to Take. 1. Skim the article without taking notes: Read the abstract. The abstract will tell you the major findings of the article and why they matter. Read first for the "big picture.". Note any terms or techniques you need to define. Jot down any questions or parts you don't understand.
Rephrase the article in your own words and write down all the main and crucial points. Once done, review it carefully and make sure that you did not miss anything important. 5. Add a Short and Engaging Title. Your article review should have a short, creative title that is strong enough to grab readers' attention.
Writing a Literature Review. A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels ...
A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results. Writing a review of literature is to provide a ...
Abstract. Scientific review articles are comprehensive, focused reviews of the scientific literature written by subject matter experts. The task of writing a scientific review article can seem overwhelming; however, it can be managed by using an organized approach and devoting sufficient time to the process.
An article review essay is a critical analysis or evaluation of literature in a given field through making a summary of the article in question, comparison, or classification. In case it is a scientific article being reviewed, the writer will be required to use database searches to retrieve the results of the search.
A review article is a comprehensive summary of the current understanding of a specific research topic and is based on previously published research. Unlike research papers, it does not contain new results, but can propose new inferences based on the combined findings of previous research.
The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements: The question (s) to be dealt with.
A 20-page article may perfectly fit a researcher's needs. Sustaining that argument for 200 pages might be unnecessary -- or impossible. The quality of a research article and the legitimacy of its findings are verified by other scholars, prior to publication, through a rigorous evaluation method called peer-review. This seal of approval by other ...
An essay and practice on embodiment. By Scott Tusa Aug 04, 2024 Photo by Raimond Klavins. Whether you're a Buddhist practitioner, a meditator, someone interested in the topic, or you just happened upon this writing, I believe I can make the case that recollecting the Buddha holds value for you. ... This article was adapted from a piece that ...
As an early step in the process to review the Corporate Net-Zero Standard, in line with the regular review cycle, the SBTi is today releasing four technical outputs: Scope 3 discussion paper : A discussion paper setting out the SBTi's initial thinking on potential changes being explored around scope 3 target setting, including underlying ...
Sliced bread has long existed, but its mechanization and increased scale in the 20th century increased its prevalence: Even in diverse cities like London today, "for every miche, roti, baozi, challah, injera, flatbread and focaccia, there are at least as many loaves of plain white," Isaac Rangaswami writes in Vittles.