Last updated: April 2026 · 7 min read · Audience: Authors, students, early-career researchers · Reading level: Introductory
Introduction
Review papers synthesise existing literature to identify patterns, gaps, or recommendations. They are distinct from research articles in both content and conventions, and not all journals accept them. The choice of journal should follow both scope fit and format support.
This page covers the general considerations. Specific methodological standards (PRISMA for systematic reviews, JBI for scoping reviews, etc.) are covered in those formal guidelines.
Review formats and their expectations
| Format | What it does | Typical methodology |
|---|---|---|
| Systematic review | Comprehensive search to a research question | PRISMA; explicit search strategy and inclusion criteria |
| Meta-analysis | Statistical aggregation of results | PRISMA; pooled effect sizes; heterogeneity analysis |
| Narrative review | Selective synthesis of relevant literature | Defined scope; thematic organisation |
| Scoping review | Maps the breadth of a field | JBI guidelines; broader inclusion than systematic |
| Umbrella review | Reviews multiple systematic reviews | PRISMA; methodological assessment of included reviews |
Practical guidance
- Confirm the journal accepts review papers and which review types in particular.
- Follow the appropriate methodology framework (PRISMA, JBI, etc.) for the review type.
- Pre-register systematic reviews where possible (PROSPERO for biomedical fields).
- Make the contribution explicit: what does this review identify that prior work has not?
- Address methodology limitations honestly; reviewers expect this in review papers.
Common review-paper mistakes
Decision guidance
Match review type to question. Questions requiring comprehensive evidence (clinical, policy) suit systematic or meta-analytic reviews. Questions about a field's current state suit scoping or narrative reviews. Questions about specific concepts may suit umbrella reviews. The format follows the question.
Example scenarios
Scenario: a PhD student writing their first systematic review
Systematic reviews require pre-registration (where possible), an explicit search strategy, and PRISMA reporting. The work is substantial — typically 6–12 months — and should be planned early. Pre-registration on PROSPERO (for biomedical) prevents claims of post-hoc adjustment.
Scenario: an established researcher writing a narrative review
Narrative reviews are typically invited by editors but can also be submitted unsolicited. The contribution is usually theoretical rather than methodological; the review should advance an argument about the field, not merely describe it.
Scenario: a researcher writing a scoping review
Scoping reviews map a broader area than systematic reviews and have less stringent inclusion criteria. They are useful for emerging fields where the literature has not yet stabilised. JBI guidelines provide the methodology standard.
What to do next
Identify the appropriate review format for the question, confirm journal acceptance, and follow the relevant methodology framework. Authors targeting EP Journals Group venues can submit reviews to journals where the format fits the scope.
Frequently asked questions
Related topics across the knowledge centre
Guide
Avoiding Plagiarism in Academic Research
A clear explanation of what counts as plagiarism in academic research, how to avoid it in practice, and how journals detect and respond to it.
Guide
What is Indexing in Academic Journals?
An overview of how academic indexing operates, the principal categories of indexing services, and the implications of indexing status for authors and journals.
Comparison
EP Journals vs Predatory Journals: How to Tell the Difference
A practical comparison helping researchers distinguish legitimate structured open-access publishers, such as EP Journals, from predatory journals that lack genuine peer review, transparent fees, or verifiable editorial governance.
Comparison
Indexed vs Non-Indexed Journals: A Practical Comparison
A practical comparison of indexed and non-indexed journals across multiple indexing tiers, helping authors interpret indexing claims accurately and choose venues whose indexing matches their needs.
Publishing
Low-Cost Research Journals
Low-cost journals span subscription venues with no author fee, diamond open-access journals fully subsidised by institutions, and open-access journals with modest APCs. Verifying credibility matters more than the headline number.
Publishing
How to Publish a Research Paper in Law
A practical, field-specific guide to publishing research in law, covering norms, challenges, the step-by-step process, where to publish, and how to choose between journal types.
Resource
Journals for Students: Where to Publish Early Research
Students are typically best served by open-access journals that maintain transparent peer review, modest article processing charges (APCs), and clearly documented timelines.
Resource
Journals for Multidisciplinary Research
Multidisciplinary work fits journals explicitly oriented toward cross-field research, generalist scientific journals, or specialty journals where the work's primary discipline anchors. The choice depends on which audience the work most needs to reach.
Related reading and next steps
- Submission portal — Submit a manuscript through the central form
- Journals list — Six peer-reviewed journals across disciplines
- Writing a research paper step by step
- How to choose a research topic
- Structured vs unstructured
- Publishing in engineering
Editorial enquiries
Questions about this guide or about preparing a manuscript for submission may be directed to the editorial office. Where a query relates to a specific journal in the portfolio, please indicate the journal abbreviation in your message.
Email: editor@ep-journals.org