title: Writing a narrative biomedical review: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors.
abstract: Review articles comprehensively covering a specific topic are crucial for successful research and academic projects. Most editors consider review articles for special and regular issues of journals. Writing a review requires deep knowledge and understanding of a field. The aim of this review is to analyze the main steps in writing a narrative biomedical review and to consider points that may increase the chances of success. We performed a comprehensive search through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science using the following keywords: review of the literature, narrative review, title, abstract, authorship, ethics, peer review, research methods, medical writing, scientific writing, and writing standards. Opinions expressed in the review are also based on personal experience as authors, peer reviewers, and editors.
authors.affiliation: Department of Rheumatology, Clinical Research Unit, Dudley Group of Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of University of Birmingham, UK), Russell's Hall Hospital, North Block, Dudley, West Midlands, DY1 2HQ, United Kingdom. a.gasparyan@gmail.com
authors.forename: Armen Yuri
authors.initials: AY
authors.lastname: Gasparyan
authors.forename: Lilit
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Ayvazyan
authors.forename: Heather
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Blackmore
authors.forename: George D
authors.initials: GD
authors.lastname: Kitas
mesh_terms: D016206:Databases, Bibliographic; D006801:Humans; D033262:Narration; D010380:Peer Review / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D011643:Publishing / Q000592:standards*; D012196:Review Literature as Topic; D014956:Writing / Q000592:standards*