Citation- PLEASE USE APA
Topic- how does stress affect Polycystic ovary syndrome
Aim: The aim is to review a substantial body of literature on a biobehavioral health topic and present a synthesis of current knowledge on the subject.
Special Considerations: The Narrative Review should not be formatted following the IMRaD style. Students should identify a question of interest related to the topic and determine an scope of the review. If a topic is quite broad, as many biobehavioral health topics are, the student should limit the scope of the review to a substantive domain, such as treatment or prevention, characteristics of the condition, health messages, etc.
Content & Organization: The question of interest should guide the scope and content of the written paper. Students must identify relevant sub-topics within the broader topic and organize the paper with logical, descriptive sections. All sections should be unified by a common theme. Sections should be arranged in a logical order with meaningful transitions. An abstract and references are required in addition to the other sections of the paper.
For example, a question of interest may be, “Can human genetic engineering offer hope in the treatment of Huntington’s Disease.” In this case, the scope of the review should be limited to genetic engineering and its application to Huntington’s Disease. Some logical sections within the paper may be, Introduction to the Genetics of Huntington’s Disease; Animal Models of Huntington’s Disease; Viral Vectors for Genetic Insertions; New Approaches and Future Directions. Notice how these sections are within the scope of the question and are unified by theme. Avoid topic sections that aren’t clearly within the scope of the question. Some examples in this instance might be: Signs or Symptoms of Huntington’s Disease; Incidence and Prevalence, Health Disparities in Huntington’s Disease, etc. The choice of topics within the review will be unique to each student and topic.
Requirements: The Narrative/Literature Review must incorporate at least 30 relevant scholarly sources. An in-depth discussion of the research from at least 10 of the cited sources must be incorporated in the review.
Additional suggestions for style and quality in a narrative review paper:
A logical progression across the major sections of the paper and a good use of support for main arguments within each paragraph of each major section is critical for a well written narrative review. A useful exercise to test the logical structure of your section headings is to turn each major section of the paper into one or two main points that you want to make in that section, then string all those sentences together into a big paragraph. If this makes sense and there’s a good way to make transitions from one section to the next, you know you’ve done a nice job. You can also use this as the abstract of the paper.
It is also very useful to study how other researchers write and organize review articles. One technique for doing so is called reverse outlining. Try this method as you are getting started with your own by choosing a relevant existing review article and following the instructions at this webiste: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/689/1/
This method can help you identify how the “plot” of a scientific article builds up and moves from area to area in a coherent way. Once you know what you want to do with the structure of your paper, be sure to signal the audience consistently about what you’re doing and why in each section and paragraph. Do this with section headings, quality topic sentences, and occasionally add transition statements that explain how one section of writing builds a framework for the next important part.
