Review article
Narrative or scoping review: search plan, synthesis structure, references
What it is
Review article: Narrative or scoping review: search plan, synthesis structure, references. In plain words, it is a written document that explains this work clearly to the people who need to read, check, or use it.
Who needs it and why
Researchers summarising a field for newcomers and specialists.
Clear writing makes your work easier to review, use, and cite, and it saves time for everyone who reads it.
Sample outline
- Scope and question
- Search approach
- Themes or framework
- Synthesis by theme
- Gaps and future work
This is a made-up outline to show the shape of a typical document of this type. Your own sections depend on your work and any template you must follow.
How our writing support works
- Tell us what you need on the order form: type, length, deadline, and any template.
- We understand your goal and agree an outline with you.
- You write each section; we give structure, language, and clarity feedback.
- We check references, consistency, and similarity, and flag gaps.
- A mentor reviews the draft and you revise it.
- You receive a final checklist and an authorship record.
You write it; we support you. We never write it for you, and you keep full authorship.
Advantages
- Clear structure from day one
- Feedback from experienced mentors
- Checks run while you write
- You stay the author
Benefits
- Readers understand your work faster
- Fewer rounds of revision
- More confidence when you submit or share it
Value
A clear, well-structured Review article saves time for every reviewer and user, and it reflects the real quality of your work.
Common mistakes
- Starting without an outline
- Missing or inconsistent references
- Not following the required format
- Leaving checks until the last day
Checklist
- ☐ Outline agreed
- ☐ Required format followed
- ☐ References complete and consistent
- ☐ Similarity pre-check run
- ☐ Final read-through done
Existing practice, models and how many exist
Existing models & sample templates
- EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines library — www.equator-network.org
- ICMJE Recommendations (manuscript structure) — www.icmje.org
Who already uses it
- Annual Reviews and Cochrane publish narrative and systematic reviews
Identifier agencies that register it
Crossref · DataCite · mEDRA · JaLC · KISTI · CNKI · Airiti · Chinese DOI (ISTIC)
How many exist so far
| What was counted | Count · years | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Crossref: all registered journal articles (broader category; no reliable count for this exact sub-type) | 124,745,059 · publication years 1665–2026 | api.crossref.org |
| DataCite: records of resource type journal-article with “review” in the title | 187,573 · publication years 1857–2026 | api.datacite.org |
Counts are live totals from public registry APIs on the date shown and change daily. Year ranges are the publication years recorded in the metadata (older items are often digitised later). Where no reliable count exists we say so rather than guess. Agency and organisation names belong to their owners and are shown only as facts about existing practice; Dotzy is independent and is not a partner, affiliate or agent of any of them.
FAQ
Will you write it for me?
No. You write it; we support you with structure, language, references, checks, and mentor feedback.
What does it cost?
Prices start from ₹17,999 per project. The final quote depends on length and deadline.
Who is the author?
You are. We never ghost-write; you keep full authorship.
How long does it take?
It depends on length and your deadline; tell us your date on the order form.