Inicio

Review of articles of journal

Think about structuring your review like an inverted pyramid. Put the most important information at the top, followed by details and examples in the center, and any additional points at the very bottom.

In your own words, summarize what the manuscript claims to report. This shows the editor how you interpreted the manuscript and will highlight any major differences in perspective between you and the other reviewers. End this section with your recommended course of action. Within each section, you can talk about the biggest issues first or go systematically figure-by-figure or claim-by-claim.

Number each item so that your points are easy to follow this will also make it easier for the authors to respond to each point. Major vs. Major issues should consist of the essential points the authors need to address before the manuscript can proceed. Minor issues are still important but typically will not affect the overall conclusions of the manuscript.

Be careful not to get too bogged down by your summary. Remember, this section of your paper should highlight the main points of the article you are critiquing. Don't feel obligated to summarize each little detail of the main paper.

Review of journal article

Focus instead on giving the reader an overall idea of the content of the article. In this section, you should provide your critique of the article.

Describe any problems you had with the author's premise, methods, or conclusions. Your critique might focus on problems with the author's argument, presentation or on information, and alternatives that have been overlooked. When evaluating a study, summarize the main findings, including the strength of evidence for each main outcome and consider their relevance to key demographic groups. Organize your paper carefully and be careful not to jump around from one argument to the next.

Argue one point at a time. Doing this will ensure that your paper flow's well and is easy to read. Your critique paper should end with an overview of the article's argument, your conclusions, and your reactions.

Ever wonder what your personality type means? Sign up to find out more in our Healthy Mind newsletter. Pautasso M. It could of course be argued that this is good peer review journal articles to reach meaningful conclusions in this specific case.

The paper by Chevalier et al. The authors tested the CytoPatch automated patch-clamp equipment and performed whole-cell recordings in HEK cells stably transfected with human Nav1.

Critical review journal article

Furthermore, they also tested the electrophysiological properties of human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes hiPS provided by Cellular Dynamics International. The title and abstract are appropriate for the content of the text. Furthermore, the article is well constructed, the experiments were well conducted, and analysis was well performed.

I NaL is a small current component generated by a fraction of Nav1. I NaL critically determines action potential duration APDin such a way that both acquired myocardial ischemia and heart failure among others or inherited long QT type 3 diseases that augmented the I NaL magnitude also increase the susceptibility to cardiac arrhythmias.

Therefore, I NaL has been recognized as an important target for the development of drugs with either antiischemic or antiarrhythmic effects.

Unfortunately, accurate measurement of I NaL is a time consuming and technical challenge because peer review journal article its extra-small density. The review of articles of journal patch clamp device tested by Chevalier et al. The results here presented merit some comments and arise some unresolved questions.

First, in some experiments such is the case in experiments B and D in Figure 2 current recordings obtained before the ranolazine perfusion seem to be quite unstable. Indeed, the amplitude progressively increased to a maximum value that was considered as the control value highlighted with arrows.

Can this problem be overcome? Is this a consequence of a slow intracellular dialysis? Second, as shown in Figure 2, intensity of drug effects seems to be quite variable.

Even assuming the normal biological variability, we wonder as to whether this broad range of effect intensities can be justified by changes in the perfusion system. Has been the automated dispensing system tested? The authors demonstrated that the recording quality was so high that the automated device allows to the differentiation between noise and current, even when measuring currents of less than 5 pA of amplitude.

By means of this method, Chevalier et al. We respectfully would like to stress that these considerations must be put writing personal essay for college admission pay context from a pharmacological point of view. This comment points towards the fact that for a precise mechanistic study of ionic current modifying drugs it is mandatory to analyze drug effects with much more complicated pulse protocols.

Questions thus are: does this automated equipment allow to the analysis of the frequency- time- and voltage-dependent effects of drugs? Can versatile and complicated pulse protocols be applied? Does it allow to a good voltage control even when generated currents are big and fast?

If this is not possible, and by means of its extraordinary discrimination between current and noise, this automated patch-clamp equipment will only be helpful for rapid I NaL -modifying drug screening. Obviously it will also be perfect to test HERG blocking drug effects as demanded by the regulatory authorities. Finally, as cardiac electrophysiologists, we would like to stress that it seems that our dream of testing drug effects on human ventricular myocytes seems to come true.

Indeed, human atrial myocytes are technically, ethically and logistically difficult to get, but human ventricular are almost impossible to be obtained unless from the explanted hearts from patients at the end stage of cardiac diseases.

Here the authors demonstrated that ventricular myocytes derived from hiPS generate beautiful action potentials that can be recorded with this automated equipment. The traces shown suggested that there was not alternation in the action potential duration. Is this a consistent finding?

How long do last these stable recordings? The only comment is that resting membrane potential seems to be somewhat variable. Can this be resolved? Is it an unexpected veratridine effect? Standardization of maturation methods of ventricular myocytes derived from hiPS will be a big achievement for cardiac cellular electrophysiology which was obliged for years to the imprecise extrapolation of data obtained from a combination of several species none of which was representative of human electrophysiology.

The big deal will be the maturation of human atrial myocytes derived from hiPS that fulfil the known characteristics of human atrial cells. We suggest suppressing the initial sentence of section 3. We surmise that results obtained from the experiments described in this section cannot serve to understand the role of I NaL in arrhythmogenesis.

Van Driessche W, Lindemann B: Concentration dependence of currents through single sodium-selective pores in frog skin. The authors have clarified several of the questions I raised in my previous review.

Peer review journal article

Unfortunately, most of the major problems have not been addressed by this revision. As I stated in my previous review, I deem it unlikely that all those issues can be solved merely by a few added paragraphs. Instead there are still some fundamental concerns with the experimental design and, most critically, with the analysis. This means the strong conclusions put forward by this manuscript are not warranted and I cannot approve the manuscript in this form.

Based on all these factors, it is impossible for me to approve this manuscript. I should however write my paper fast that it is laudable that the authors chose to make all the raw data of their experiment publicly available.

Without this it would have impossible for me to carry out the additional analyses, and thus the most fundamental problem in the analysis would have remained unknown. I am honoured by the request for an adversarial collaboration. I do not rule out such efforts at some point in the future.

However, for all of the reasons outlined in this and my previous review, I do not think the time is right for this experiment to proceed to this stage. Fundamental analytical flaws and weaknesses in the design should be ruled out first. An adversarial collaboration only really makes sense to me for paradigms were we can be confident that mundane or trivial factors have been excluded. This manuscript does an excellent job demonstrating significant strain differences in Burdian's paradigm.

Since each Drosophila lab has their own wild type usually Canton-S isolate, this issue of strain differences is actually a very important one for between lab reproducibility. This work is a good reminder for all geneticists to pay attention to the population effects in the background controls, and presumably the mutant lines we are comparing.

I was very pleased to see the within-isolate behavior was consistent in replicate experiments one year apart. I believe this is a very reasonable and testable hypothesis. It predicts that genetic variability for these traits exist within the populations. Two other things that I liked about this manuscript are the ability to adjust parameters in figure 3, and our ability to download the raw data.

After reading the manuscript, I was a little disappointed that the performance of the five strains in each 12 behavioral variables weren't broken down individually in a table or figure. I thought this may help us readers understand what the principle components were representing. The authors have made this data readily accessible in a downloadable spreadsheet. The article highlights important data that might have been overlooked when promulgating the clinical value of CETPIs and related trials.

The Wiley et al. I believe the importance of this paper stems from the applicability of the approach to sample journal article review several thousand of rare human disease genes that Next-Gen sequencing will uncover in the next few years and the challenge we will have in figuring out the function of these genes and their resulting defects. This work presents a paradigm that can be broadly and usefully applied.

In detail, the authors begin with gene responsible for X-linked spinal muscular atrophy and express both the wild-type version of that human gene as well as a mutant form of that gene in S.

The conceptual leap here is that progress in genetics is driven by phenotype, and this approach involving a yeast with no spine or muscles to atrophy critical review journal article nevertheless and N-dimensional detector of phenotype. The study is not without a small measure of luck in that expression of the wild-type UBA1 gene caused a slow growth phenotype which the mutant did not.

Hence there was something in S. Given this phenotype, the authors then went to work and using the power of the synthetic genetic array approach pioneered by Boone and colleagues made a systematic set of double mutants combining the human expressed UBA1 gene with knockout alleles of a plurality of S. They found well over a hundred mutations that either enhanced or suppressed the growth defect of the cells expressing UBI1. Most of these have human orthologs. My hunch is that many human genes expressed in yeast will have some comparably exploitable phenotype, and time will tell.

Building on the interaction networks of S. Here, the awesome power of the model organism community comes into the picture as there is a zebrafish model of spinal muscular atrophy.

The principle of phenologs articulated by the Marcotte group inspire the recognition of the transitive logic of how phenotypes in one organism relate to phenotypes in another. With this zebrafish model, they were able to confirm that an inhibitor of E3 ligases and of the Nedd8-E1 activating suppressed the motor axon anomalies, as predicted by the effect of mutations in S.

I believe this is an important paper to teach in intro graduate courses as it illustrates beautifully how important it is to know about and embrace the many new sources of systematic genetic information and apply them broadly. This paper by Amrhein et al. The example concerns a woman who is carrying twins, both male as determined by sonogram and we ignore the possibility that gender has been observed incorrectly. The parents-to-be ask Efron to tell them the probability that the twins are identical.

This is my first open review, so I'm not sure of the protocol. But given that there appears to be errors in both Efron b and the paper under review, I am sorry to say that my review might actually be longer than the article by Efron athe primary focus of the critique, and the critique itself. I apologize in advance for this. To start, I will outline the problem being discussed for the sake of readers.

This problem has various parameters of interest. The bone of contention in the Efron papers and the critique by Amrhein et al. The paper by Amrhein et al. Apparently, the doctor knows that one third of twins are identical 2. Now, what would happen if we review of journal article have the doctor's knowledge? In contrast, Amrhein et al. No one is violating logic - they are merely expressing ignorance by specifying equal probabilities to all states of nature.

Whether this is philosophically valid is debatable Colyvanbut weight to that question, and it is well beyond the scope of this review. After your initial search in PubMedlook for the "Articles Types" filter on the left side of the page. Be sure to uncheck peer review journal articles article types if you would like to limit your search to review articles. From the UCLA Library homepageclick the " Journals " tab to search for academic journals that focus on publishing review articles.

Search for your discipline or subject area, and Review e. On the results page, browse the list of journals, and then click on a title to visit the journal's website. In both Google Scholar and ArticlesPlus you can add review"literature review""annual review" or "review article" to your search terms. Chaudhury, D. Select cognitive deficits in vasoactive intestinal peptide deficient mice.

As you analyze the article, you use your own ideas and research experience. Your overall conclusions about the article base off on your own judgment backed up by your experience in this field and your common sense.

You only talk about the research already performed by the article's author. You do not perform any new research yourself.

How to Write an Article Review (with Sample Reviews) - wikiHow

You should know exactly how you will be writing your article review before you even read the article in question. This is because you should know which points of the article are most important to your review in advance.

The article review outline usually goes like this:. Read the introduction, the conclusion, the first sentences of each paragraph. Then read several opening paragraphs. Only then you should read the whole article. This first reading is only for getting the overall idea of the point that the author sought to make with this article. Carefully read the article several more times. If you are reading it from a screen, use a highlighter for the most meaningful parts.

If you are using a print version, use a pen. The most meaningful parts here are the main points and the facts to support them. Instead, make notes on the margins and draw connections between different parts of the article. It is best to do it in written form, such as an outline or a piece of free writing.

Basically, you just put the information you have just read in your own words. This should include the author's claim, the conducted research, and the argument s. You need to be careful and accurate not to miss any important details. This text is only for your use, so it does not need any editing or proofreading, but it needs to be clear so that you could return to it at any time and not spend time remembering what exactly you meant by this review of articles of journal that.

Look at your summary to see if the author was clear about each of them. Then put together the lists of strong points and drawbacks and summarize them. For example, a strong point may be the introduction of new information, and a drawback may be the lack of accuracy in representing the existing knowledge on the topic.

Add these outcomes to your study and back them up with evidence from the text of the article.The primary objective of the summary is to present journal article review template brief overview of the authors' essential points to the reader, making it important that you unpack those arguments and explain them in your own words.

Fill in the blanks and assumptions, helping to clarify the research and summarize it briefly. This is sometimes more important in summaries dealing with articles in the humanities. For example, it might be helpful to unpack dense arguments about poet George Herbert's relationship to the divine with more pedestrian summaries: "The author seeks to humanize Herbert by discussing his daily routines, as opposed to his philosophies.

Don't draw your own conclusions.

Article & Journal Templates: Article Layouts & Formats - Author Services

A summary of an article shouldn't editorialize, or offer your own interpretations of the data, unless explicitly stated as part of the assignment. In general, the point of a summary is to summarize the authors' points, not to offer your own additions and editorials. This can be difficult for some inexperienced research writers to get the hang of at first, but remember to keep the "I" out of it.

Refrain from using direct quotations of text from the journal article. Quotations are more often used when writing a college paper or essay, and are less important for a journal article summary. Focus more on paraphrasing the ideas when writing a journal article summary without losing focus of their meaning and intended content. Use present tense. Always use the present tense when you are discussing the contents of a scholarly article. This will help you maintain a parallel grammatical structure throughout.

Revise your draft. Good writing happens in revision. Go back and compare the focus and content of what you have written to see that it matches and supports the context of the journal article.

A journal article that has been properly summarized provides potential readers with a short review, which is important when they are browsing and searching for specific information about a particular topic. Sample Scientific Journal Article Summary. Sample Educational Journal Article Summary.

A "refereed" journal article is the same as a peer-reviewed journal article. This just means that all of the content has been fact-checked by a panel of experts before being approved for publication. All of the above steps apply. Not Helpful 0 Helpful Step 6 says to take notes while I read. Is it a good idea to take notes while scanning or should Peer review journal articles just take notes after? Daniela Alvarez. Take notes while scanning to remember what interested you the most. Afterwards, go back, if the article will be used, to understand those topics better so that if peer review journal articles had to explain it to someone, you could without a problem.

Not Helpful 4 Helpful Taqi Anwar. Read all articles and write separate summaries. Then summarize the similar summaries once again; hence you will get two to three similar drafts. Some of our journals accept manuscripts that use a LaTeX template.

Home Writing your paper Formatting and templates. The template provided here includes a filled-out example article, the Science bibliography style, example bibliography and the scicite package used for formatting the reference numbers. The template is extensively commented and sectioned to make writing your Science manuscript easy. For this, they provide the IEEEtran class and demo templates which contain the structure and reference style they would like for submissions.

For this, they provide a demo template which contains the structure and reference style they would like for submissions. Students must know how to write an article summary.

An article review is a paper that contains a critical, well-structured assessment of the chosen literature. It is not enough to make up a summary of the article. It is one of the four steps on the way to excellent article content evaluation. The 4 ways to prepare a meaningful article below.

A student who wants to learn what is a review article should use a database research within article review. The main two elements of article review are a theoretical and objective discussion.

It allows learning how to explore and assess information. Sharing personal critical opinions is another factor. An article review targets the audience which is conversant with the certain field of knowledge. Many students simply include article summary using the language they want, but this piece must follow official English language. Instead sample journal article review reviewing how well an employee does in his job, this specific form reviews how a journal does in expressing a particular subject or topic.

It will also mention the central themes of the article and the arguments and claims of the author. You also need to state the author's thesis.

Sometimes, the thesis has multiple points. The thesis may not be clearly stated in the article, so you may have to determine the thesis yourself. Do: give an overall impression of the article using the third person and a formal, academic style. Summarize the article. Express the main points, arguments, and findings of the article in your own words, referring to your summary for assistance.

Show how the article supports its claims. Make sure to include the article's conclusions. This may be done in several paragraphs, although the length will depend on requirements established by your instructor or publisher.

Don't: cover specific examples, statistics, or background information familiar to experts in the field. Do: capture the main points of each assignment project, as space allows. Write your critique. Use your outline of opinions to write several paragraphs explaining how well the author addressed the topic. Express your opinion about whether the article was a clear, thorough, and useful explanation of the subject.

This is the core of your article review. Evaluate the article's contribution to the field and the importance to the field. Decide if the author's points help her argument. Identify any biases. Decide if you agree with the writer, then provide sufficient support as to why or why not. End by suggesting which audiences would benefit from reading the article. Don't: fill your review with a long list of unrelated critiques.

Do: tie your grievances and praise together into a coherent argument, forming your own thesis. Conclude the article review. In a paragraph, summarize the main points of the article, as well as your opinions about its significance, accuracy, and clarity.

If relevant, also comment on implications for further research or discussion in the field. The arguments in the article show the presence of bias, prejudice, argumentative writing without supporting details, and misinformation. Reread the review. Look for grammar, mechanics, and usage mistakes. Make sure to cut any extra, unneeded information. Make sure you have identified and discussed the key issues in the article. Alexander Peterman, MA. Typically, you won't want to include tables or figures in your review, because this would usually indicate added information from your perspective.

However, you can reference tables and figures in the original work, such as by saying, "In Figure 2. Not Helpful 10 Helpful It would depend on the subject of the review article. If the article you're writing requires a lot of knowledge about outside articles, then you will need to read as many as possible, though there is no required minimum.

Besides, highlight the knowledge that the author has contributed to the field. Also, write about the gaps and contradictions in the article. Take a standpoint of either supporting or not with the author's assertions but back your arguments with facts and relevant theories that are pertinent to the area of knowledge. Rubrics and templates can also be used to evaluate and grade the person reviewing the article. In this section, revisit the critical points of your piece, your findings of the article, and your critique.

Also write about the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the results of the article review. Give way forward for future research in the field of study. Before submitting your article, keep these pointers in mind:. As you read your critical review journal article, highlight the key points. This will help you pinpoint the article's main argument and the evidence that they use to support that argument.

While you write your review, use evidence from your sources to make a point. This is best done using direct quotations. Select quotes and supporting evidence adequately and use direct quotations sparingly.

Seguro de Vida

¿Cómo garantizar la tranquilidad económica de su familia? ¿Qué tan importante es el futuro de su familia? ¿Necesito un Seguro de Vida? ¿Dónde puedo comprarlo? Para obtener respuesta a estas y otras preguntas, no dude en contactar a su compañia de confianza o a su intermediario de seguros.

Seguro de Vehículos

¿Cuánto cuesta una reparación mayor? ¿Qué tan útil es tu vehículo? ¿Necesito un seguro de automóvil? ¿Dónde puedo comprarlo? Para obtener respuesta a estas y otras preguntas, no dude en contactar a su compañía de confianza o a su intermediario de seguros.

Seguro de Salud

¿Cuánto cuesta un tratamiento médico? ¿Quién me ayuda cuando estoy enfermo? ¿Necesito un seguro de salud? ¿Dónde puedo comprarlo? Para obtener respuesta a estas y otras preguntas, no dude en contactar a su compañía de confianza o a su intermediario de seguros.

Visión

Ser una asociación integrada al mercado global, dinámica y propositiva, en donde cada uno de sus asociados participe activamente y se favorezca por la contribución de ésta a los resultados del mercado, su protagonismo y representatividad en los sectores financiero y público y en el crecimiento de la industria aseguradora.

Misión

La Asociación Guatemalteca de Instituciones de Seguros -–AGIS- es la entidad que agrupa voluntariamente a las aseguradoras del país, que contribuye al desarrollo y crecimiento de la industria del seguro y persigue el interés común de sus asociados basados en los principios de libre empresa y la técnica universal del seguro.

 

Fines y Objetivos

Agrupar a las Aseguradoras privadas del país, promoviendo el desarrollo y perfeccionamiento de la industria del seguro, mediante la difusión de las ventajas de esta actividad representa para el país, creando y patrocinando órganos divulgativos y Comités de trabajo.

Crear, fomentar y estrechar las relaciones entre las diversas entidades que integran la Asociación y de ésta con las demás asociaciones privadas e internacionales de seguros.

Investigar nuevas modalidades del seguro en general, para abrir campos amplios a su desarrollo en nuestro país.

Recopilar datos relativos al funcionamiento de los diferentes ramos del seguro con el fin de llegar a formar una estadística de experiencia guatemalteca y de Centroamérica.

 

Breve Historia

La AGIS fue fundada en 1953. Es una Asociación no lucrativa, que agrupa a 15 Compañías Aseguradoras autorizadas y supervisadas por la Superintendencia de Bancos de Guatemala. Dentro de sus objetivos primordiales está la promoción del Seguro y la divulgación de sus beneficios. Prioriza con importancia la profesionalización del gremio asegurador, por lo que AGIS vela por el constante crecimiento de un sector sólido y ordenado que aporte a la economía del país, apegados a las más altas normas de eficiencia, sentido de responsabilidad y ética. AGIS fomenta y estrecha las relaciones entre sus asociados, así como con las entidades gubernamentales, sectores comerciales y asociaciones que suman a la economía de Guatemala.

 

Nuestra Ubicación

Nuestra Dirección:
Avenida La Reforma, 9-55 Zona 10
Edificio Reforma 10, Oficina 905
Horario de Atención:
Lunes a Viernes de 8:00 a 17:00
PBX: (502) 2361-7067

Aviso Legal

El acceso y uso de esta página web y todos los subdominios y directorios incluidos bajo la misma (en adelante, conjuntamente denominados como el Portal) están sujetos a los términos que se detallan en este Aviso Legal.

La AGIS se reserva el derecho a realizar cambios en el Portal sin previo aviso, con el objeto de actualizar, corregir, modificar, añadir o eliminar los contenidos o el diseño. Debido a que la actualización de la información no es inmediata, le sugerimos que compruebe siempre la vigencia y exactitud de la información, servicios y contenidos presentados.

Tanto el diseño del Portal y sus códigos fuente, como los logos, marcas, y demás signos distintivos que aparecen en el mismo, pertenecen al AGIS o a sus Compañías Asociadas y están protegidos por los correspondientes derechos de propiedad intelectual e industrial.

La información disponible en este sitio Web, salvo indicación expresa en contrario, es susceptible de reutilización.

Contáctenos

Dirección Ejecutiva: Paola van der Beek de Andrino,  Esta dirección de correo electrónico está siendo protegida contra los robots de spam. Necesita tener JavaScript habilitado para poder verlo.

Asistencia Ejecutiva: Claudia Rodríguez,  Esta dirección de correo electrónico está siendo protegida contra los robots de spam. Necesita tener JavaScript habilitado para poder verlo.

Oficina Actuarial: Carme de González,  Esta dirección de correo electrónico está siendo protegida contra los robots de spam. Necesita tener JavaScript habilitado para poder verlo.

Webmaster: Héctor Aguirre Zamora, Esta dirección de correo electrónico está siendo protegida contra los robots de spam. Necesita tener JavaScript habilitado para poder verlo.

Información:  Esta dirección de correo electrónico está siendo protegida contra los robots de spam. Necesita tener JavaScript habilitado para poder verlo.