what is a critical article review

How to Write Critical Reviews

When you are asked to write a critical review of a book or article, you will need to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. In other words, you will be examining another person’s thoughts on a topic from your point of view.

Your stand must go beyond your “gut reaction” to the work and be based on your knowledge (readings, lecture, experience) of the topic as well as on factors such as criteria stated in your assignment or discussed by you and your instructor.

Make your stand clear at the beginning of your review, in your evaluations of specific parts, and in your concluding commentary.

Remember that your goal should be to make a few key points about the book or article, not to discuss everything the author writes.

Understanding the Assignment

To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work–deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain points and prevent you from merely summarizing what the author says. Assuming the role of an analytical reader will also help you to determine whether or not the author fulfills the stated purpose of the book or article and enhances your understanding or knowledge of a particular topic.

Be sure to read your assignment thoroughly before you read the article or book. Your instructor may have included specific guidelines for you to follow. Keeping these guidelines in mind as you read the article or book can really help you write your paper!

Also, note where the work connects with what you’ve studied in the course. You can make the most efficient use of your reading and notetaking time if you are an active reader; that is, keep relevant questions in mind and jot down page numbers as well as your responses to ideas that appear to be significant as you read.

Please note: The length of your introduction and overview, the number of points you choose to review, and the length of your conclusion should be proportionate to the page limit stated in your assignment and should reflect the complexity of the material being reviewed as well as the expectations of your reader.

Write the introduction

Below are a few guidelines to help you write the introduction to your critical review.

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

If your assignment asks you to review only one book and not to use outside sources, your introduction will focus on identifying the author, the title, the main topic or issue presented in the book, and the author’s purpose in writing the book.

If your assignment asks you to review the book as it relates to issues or themes discussed in the course, or to review two or more books on the same topic, your introduction must also encompass those expectations.

Explain relationships

For example, before you can review two books on a topic, you must explain to your reader in your introduction how they are related to one another.

Within this shared context (or under this “umbrella”) you can then review comparable aspects of both books, pointing out where the authors agree and differ.

In other words, the more complicated your assignment is, the more your introduction must accomplish.

Finally, the introduction to a book review is always the place for you to establish your position as the reviewer (your thesis about the author’s thesis).

As you write, consider the following questions:

• Is the book a memoir, a treatise, a collection of facts, an extended argument, etc.? Is the article a documentary, a write-up of primary research, a position paper, etc.?
• Who is the author? What does the preface or foreword tell you about the author’s purpose, background, and credentials? What is the author’s approach to the topic (as a journalist? a historian? a researcher?)?
• What is the main topic or problem addressed? How does the work relate to a discipline, to a profession, to a particular audience, or to other works on the topic?
• What is your critical evaluation of the work (your thesis)? Why have you taken that position? What criteria are you basing your position on?

Provide an overview

In your introduction, you will also want to provide an overview. An overview supplies your reader with certain general information not appropriate for including in the introduction but necessary to understanding the body of the review.

Generally, an overview describes your book’s division into chapters, sections, or points of discussion. An overview may also include background information about the topic, about your stand, or about the criteria you will use for evaluation.

The overview and the introduction work together to provide a comprehensive beginning for (a “springboard” into) your review.

• What are the author’s basic premises? What issues are raised, or what themes emerge? What situation (i.e., racism on college campuses) provides a basis for the author’s assertions?
• How informed is my reader? What background information is relevant to the entire book and should be placed here rather than in a body paragraph?

Write the body

The body is the center of your paper, where you draw out your main arguments. Below are some guidelines to help you write it.

Organize using a logical plan

Organize the body of your review according to a logical plan. Here are two options:

• First, summarize, in a series of paragraphs, those major points from the book that you plan to discuss; incorporating each major point into a topic sentence for a paragraph is an effective organizational strategy. Second, discuss and evaluate these points in a following group of paragraphs. (There are two dangers lurking in this pattern–you may allot too many paragraphs to summary and too few to evaluation, or you may re-summarize too many points from the book in your evaluation section.)
• Alternatively, you can summarize and evaluate the major points you have chosen from the book in a point-by-point schema. That means you will discuss and evaluate point one within the same paragraph (or in several if the point is significant and warrants extended discussion) before you summarize and evaluate point two, point three, etc., moving in a logical sequence from point to point to point. Here again, it is effective to use the topic sentence of each paragraph to identify the point from the book that you plan to summarize or evaluate.

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

• What are the author’s most important points? How do these relate to one another? (Make relationships clear by using transitions: “In contrast,” an equally strong argument,” “moreover,” “a final conclusion,” etc.).
• What types of evidence or information does the author present to support his or her points? Is this evidence convincing, controversial, factual, one-sided, etc.? (Consider the use of primary historical material, case studies, narratives, recent scientific findings, statistics.)
• Where does the author do a good job of conveying factual material as well as personal perspective? Where does the author fail to do so? If solutions to a problem are offered, are they believable, misguided, or promising?
• Which parts of the work (particular arguments, descriptions, chapters, etc.) are most effective and which parts are least effective? Why?
• Where (if at all) does the author convey personal prejudice, support illogical relationships, or present evidence out of its appropriate context?

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

Remember, as you discuss the author’s major points, be sure to distinguish consistently between the author’s opinions and your own.

Keep the summary portions of your discussion concise, remembering that your task as a reviewer is to re-see the author’s work, not to re-tell it.

And, importantly, if you refer to ideas from other books and articles or from lecture and course materials, always document your sources, or else you might wander into the realm of plagiarism.

Include only that material which has relevance for your review and use direct quotations sparingly. The Writing Center has other handouts to help you paraphrase text and introduce quotations.

Write the conclusion

You will want to use the conclusion to state your overall critical evaluation.

You have already discussed the major points the author makes, examined how the author supports arguments, and evaluated the quality or effectiveness of specific aspects of the book or article.

Now you must make an evaluation of the work as a whole, determining such things as whether or not the author achieves the stated or implied purpose and if the work makes a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Consider the following questions:

• Is the work appropriately subjective or objective according to the author’s purpose?
• How well does the work maintain its stated or implied focus? Does the author present extraneous material? Does the author exclude or ignore relevant information?
• How well has the author achieved the overall purpose of the book or article? What contribution does the work make to an existing body of knowledge or to a specific group of readers? Can you justify the use of this work in a particular course?
• What is the most important final comment you wish to make about the book or article? Do you have any suggestions for the direction of future research in the area? What has reading this work done for you or demonstrated to you?

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

The Tech Edvocate

• Advertisement
• Home Page Five (No Sidebar)
• Home Page Four
• Home Page Three
• Home Page Two
• Icons [No Sidebar]
• Left Sidbear Page
• Lynch Educational Consulting
• My Speaking Page
• Newsletter Sign Up Confirmation
• Newsletter Unsubscription
• Page Example
• Privacy Policy
• Protected Content
• Request a Product Review
• Shortcodes Examples
• Terms and Conditions
• The Edvocate
• The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
• Write For Us
• Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
• The Edvocate Podcast
• Assistive Technology
• Child Development Tech
• Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech
• EdTech Futures
• EdTech News
• EdTech Policy & Reform
• EdTech Startups & Businesses
• Higher Education EdTech
• Online Learning & eLearning
• Parent & Family Tech
• Personalized Learning
• Product Reviews
• Tech Edvocate Awards
• School Ratings

Canada’s Oscar Entry ‘Universal Language’ Directed by Matthew Rankin Sells Widely for Best Friend Forever (EXCLUSIVE)

Interviews with 14 chinese vcs and entrepreneurs show many are setting up silicon valley firms only to find that any investment with chinese ties is a hard sell (li yuan/new york times), a man was left stranded on a mountain by his colleagues in a work retreat gone badly wrong, garth greenwell’s grand romance, kaytranada owns his influence, ios 18’s new clean up tool shows apple is still way behind the google pixel’s ai photo tricks, are you paying more for internet than you have to try buying your own router, a night in a chinatown shuttle with tiktok dj nick cheo, nct’s taeil dropped following sexual offence allegation, cate blanchett jokes she’s ‘going naked’ to venice premiere of ‘disclaimer’ after reporter brings up cannes dress some interpreted as pro-palestinian statement, how to write an article review (with sample reviews)  .

An article review is a critical evaluation of a scholarly or scientific piece, which aims to summarize its main ideas, assess its contributions, and provide constructive feedback. A well-written review not only benefits the author of the article under scrutiny but also serves as a valuable resource for fellow researchers and scholars. Follow these steps to create an effective and informative article review:

1. Understand the purpose: Before diving into the article, it is important to understand the intent of writing a review. This helps in focusing your thoughts, directing your analysis, and ensuring your review adds value to the academic community.

2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification.

3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review’s introduction, briefly outline the primary themes and arguments presented by the author(s). Keep it concise but sufficiently informative so that readers can quickly grasp the essence of the article.

4. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses: In subsequent paragraphs, assess the strengths and limitations of the article based on factors such as methodology, quality of evidence presented, coherence of arguments, and alignment with existing literature in the field. Be fair and objective while providing your critique.

5. Discuss any implications: Deliberate on how this particular piece contributes to or challenges existing knowledge in its discipline. You may also discuss potential improvements for future research or explore real-world applications stemming from this study.

6. Provide recommendations: Finally, offer suggestions for both the author(s) and readers regarding how they can further build on this work or apply its findings in practice.

7. Proofread and revise: Once your initial draft is complete, go through it carefully for clarity, accuracy, and coherence. Revise as necessary, ensuring your review is both informative and engaging for readers.

Sample Review:

A Critical Review of “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health”

Introduction:

“The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is a timely article which investigates the relationship between social media usage and psychological well-being. The authors present compelling evidence to support their argument that excessive use of social media can result in decreased self-esteem, increased anxiety, and a negative impact on interpersonal relationships.

Strengths and weaknesses:

One of the strengths of this article lies in its well-structured methodology utilizing a variety of sources, including quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. This approach provides a comprehensive view of the topic, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the effects of social media on mental health. However, it would have been beneficial if the authors included a larger sample size to increase the reliability of their conclusions. Additionally, exploring how different platforms may influence mental health differently could have added depth to the analysis.

Implications:

The findings in this article contribute significantly to ongoing debates surrounding the psychological implications of social media use. It highlights the potential dangers that excessive engagement with online platforms may pose to one’s mental well-being and encourages further research into interventions that could mitigate these risks. The study also offers an opportunity for educators and policy-makers to take note and develop strategies to foster healthier online behavior.

Recommendations:

Future researchers should consider investigating how specific social media platforms impact mental health outcomes, as this could lead to more targeted interventions. For practitioners, implementing educational programs aimed at promoting healthy online habits may be beneficial in mitigating the potential negative consequences associated with excessive social media use.

Conclusion:

Overall, “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is an important and informative piece that raises awareness about a pressing issue in today’s digital age. Given its minor limitations, it provides valuable

3 Ways to Make a Mini Greenhouse ...

3 ways to teach yourself to play ....

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author.

How to Clean Jade: 10 Steps

How to Read Guitar Tabs

3 Ways to Treat Elbow Bursitis

3 Simple Ways to Grow Bloodworms

4 Ways to Get a Credit Card

How to Trademark a Name: 11 Steps

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Critical Reviews

How to Write an Article Review (With Examples)

Last Updated: August 26, 2024 Fact Checked

Preparing to Write Your Review

Writing the article review, sample article reviews, expert q&a.

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. There are 12 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 3,133,651 times.

An article review is both a summary and an evaluation of another writer's article. Teachers often assign article reviews to introduce students to the work of experts in the field. Experts also are often asked to review the work of other professionals. Understanding the main points and arguments of the article is essential for an accurate summation. Logical evaluation of the article's main theme, supporting arguments, and implications for further research is an important element of a review . Here are a few guidelines for writing an article review.

Education specialist Alexander Peterman recommends: "In the case of a review, your objective should be to reflect on the effectiveness of what has already been written, rather than writing to inform your audience about a subject."

Article Review 101

• Read the article very closely, and then take time to reflect on your evaluation. Consider whether the article effectively achieves what it set out to.
• Write out a full article review by completing your intro, summary, evaluation, and conclusion. Don't forget to add a title, too!
• Proofread your review for mistakes (like grammar and usage), while also cutting down on needless information.

• Article reviews present more than just an opinion. You will engage with the text to create a response to the scholarly writer's ideas. You will respond to and use ideas, theories, and research from your studies. Your critique of the article will be based on proof and your own thoughtful reasoning.
• An article review only responds to the author's research. It typically does not provide any new research. However, if you are correcting misleading or otherwise incorrect points, some new data may be presented.
• An article review both summarizes and evaluates the article.

• Summarize the article. Focus on the important points, claims, and information.
• Discuss the positive aspects of the article. Think about what the author does well, good points she makes, and insightful observations.
• Identify contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies in the text. Determine if there is enough data or research included to support the author's claims. Find any unanswered questions left in the article.

• Make note of words or issues you don't understand and questions you have.
• Look up terms or concepts you are unfamiliar with, so you can fully understand the article. Read about concepts in-depth to make sure you understand their full context.

• Pay careful attention to the meaning of the article. Make sure you fully understand the article. The only way to write a good article review is to understand the article.

• With either method, make an outline of the main points made in the article and the supporting research or arguments. It is strictly a restatement of the main points of the article and does not include your opinions.
• After putting the article in your own words, decide which parts of the article you want to discuss in your review. You can focus on the theoretical approach, the content, the presentation or interpretation of evidence, or the style. You will always discuss the main issues of the article, but you can sometimes also focus on certain aspects. This comes in handy if you want to focus the review towards the content of a course.
• Review the summary outline to eliminate unnecessary items. Erase or cross out the less important arguments or supplemental information. Your revised summary can serve as the basis for the summary you provide at the beginning of your review.

• What does the article set out to do?
• What is the theoretical framework or assumptions?
• Are the central concepts clearly defined?
• How adequate is the evidence?
• How does the article fit into the literature and field?
• Does it advance the knowledge of the subject?
• How clear is the author's writing? Don't: include superficial opinions or your personal reaction. Do: pay attention to your biases, so you can overcome them.

• For example, in MLA , a citation may look like: Duvall, John N. "The (Super)Marketplace of Images: Television as Unmediated Mediation in DeLillo's White Noise ." Arizona Quarterly 50.3 (1994): 127-53. Print. [9] X Trustworthy Source Purdue Online Writing Lab Trusted resource for writing and citation guidelines Go to source

• For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest.

• Your introduction should only be 10-25% of your review.
• End the introduction with your thesis. Your thesis should address the above issues. For example: Although the author has some good points, his article is biased and contains some misinterpretation of data from others’ analysis of the effectiveness of the condom.

• Use direct quotes from the author sparingly.
• Review the summary you have written. Read over your summary many times to ensure that your words are an accurate description of the author's article.

• Support your critique with evidence from the article or other texts.
• The summary portion is very important for your critique. You must make the author's argument clear in the summary section for your evaluation to make sense.
• Remember, this is not where you say if you liked the article or not. You are assessing the significance and relevance of the article.
• Use a topic sentence and supportive arguments for each opinion. For example, you might address a particular strength in the first sentence of the opinion section, followed by several sentences elaborating on the significance of the point.

• This should only be about 10% of your overall essay.
• For example: This critical review has evaluated the article "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS" by Anthony Zimmerman. The arguments in the article show the presence of bias, prejudice, argumentative writing without supporting details, and misinformation. These points weaken the author’s arguments and reduce his credibility.

• Make sure you have identified and discussed the 3-4 key issues in the article.

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://libguides.cmich.edu/writinghelp/articlereview
• ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548566/
• ↑ Jake Adams. Academic Tutor & Test Prep Specialist. Expert Interview. 24 July 2020.
• ↑ https://guides.library.queensu.ca/introduction-research/writing/critical
• ↑ https://www.iup.edu/writingcenter/writing-resources/organization-and-structure/creating-an-outline.html
• ↑ https://writing.umn.edu/sws/assets/pdf/quicktips/titles.pdf
• ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_works_cited_periodicals.html
• ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548565/
• ↑ https://writingcenter.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/593/2014/06/How_to_Summarize_a_Research_Article1.pdf
• ↑ https://www.uis.edu/learning-hub/writing-resources/handouts/learning-hub/how-to-review-a-journal-article
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/

About This Article

If you have to write an article review, read through the original article closely, taking notes and highlighting important sections as you read. Next, rewrite the article in your own words, either in a long paragraph or as an outline. Open your article review by citing the article, then write an introduction which states the article’s thesis. Next, summarize the article, followed by your opinion about whether the article was clear, thorough, and useful. Finish with a paragraph that summarizes the main points of the article and your opinions. To learn more about what to include in your personal critique of the article, keep reading the article! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Prince Asiedu-Gyan

Apr 22, 2022

Did this article help you?

Sammy James

Sep 12, 2017

Juabin Matey

Aug 30, 2017

Vanita Meghrajani

Jul 21, 2016

Nov 27, 2018

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Develop the tech skills you need for work and life

• Queen's University Library
• Research Guides

Introduction to Research: Humanities and Social Sciences

• Critical Reviews
• Choosing Your Research Topic
• Finding Background Information
• Choosing Relevant Keywords
• Connecting Keywords
• Citation Searching
• Articles (General)
• Scholarly Articles
• Films & Videos
• Scholarly vs. Popular Sources
• Scholarly vs. Non-Scholarly Periodicals
• Web Resources
• Annotated Bibliography
• Reflective Writing
• Citing Sources
• Off Campus?

Writing Critical Reviews

What is a Critical Review of a Journal Article?

A critical review of a journal article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of an article's ideas and content. It provides description, analysis and interpretation that allow readers to assess the article's value.

Before You Read the Article

• What does the title lead you to expect about the article?
• Study any sub-headings to understand how the author organized the content.
• Read the abstract for a summary of the author's arguments.
• Study the list of references to determine what research contributed to the author's arguments. Are the references recent? Do they represent important work in the field?
• If possible, read about the author to learn what authority he or she has to write about the subject.
• Consult Web of Science to see if other writers have cited the author's work. (Please see 'How to use E-Indexes'.) Has the author made an important contribution to the field of study?

Reading the Article: Points to Consider

Read the article carefully. Record your impressions and note sections suitable for quoting.

• Who is the intended audience?
• What is the author's purpose? To survey and summarize research on a topic? To present an argument that builds on past research? To refute another writer's argument?
• Does the author define important terms?
• Is the information in the article fact or opinion? (Facts can be verified, while opinions arise from interpretations of facts.) Does the information seem well-researched or is it unsupported?
• What are the author's central arguments or conclusions? Are they clearly stated? Are they supported by evidence and analysis?
• If the article reports on an experiment or study, does the author clearly outline methodology and the expected result?
• Is the article lacking information or argumentation that you expected to find?
• Is the article organized logically and easy to follow?
• Does the writer's style suit the intended audience? Is the style stilted or unnecessarily complicated?
• Is the author's language objective or charged with emotion and bias?
• If illustrations or charts are used, are they effective in presenting information?

Prepare an Outline

Read over your notes. Choose a statement that expresses the central purpose or thesis of your review. When thinking of a thesis, consider the author's intentions and whether or not you think those intentions were successfully realized. Eliminate all notes that do not relate to your thesis. Organize your remaining points into separate groups such as points about structure, style, or argument. Devise a logical sequence for presenting these ideas. Remember that all of your ideas must support your central thesis.

Write the First Draft

The review should begin with a complete citation of the article. For example:

Platt, Kevin M.F. "History and Despotism, or: Hayden White vs. Ivan the Terrible  and Peter the Great." Rethinking History 3:3 (1999) : 247-269.

NOTE: Use the same bibliographic citation format as you would for any bibliography, works cited or reference list. It will follow a standard documentation style such as MLA or APA.

Be sure to ask your instructor which citation style to use. For frequently used style guides consult Queen's University Library's Citing Sources guide.

The first paragraph may contain:

• a statement of your thesis
• the author's purpose in writing the article
• comments on how the article relates to other work on the same subject
• information about the author's reputation or authority in the field

The body of the review should:

• state your arguments in support of your thesis
• follow the logical development of ideas that you mapped out in your outline
• include quotations from the article which illustrate your main ideas

The concluding paragraph may:

• summarize your review
• restate your thesis

Revise the First Draft

Ideally, you should leave your first draft for a day or two before revising. This allows you to gain a more objective perspective on your ideas. Check for the following when revising:

• grammar and punctuation errors
• organization, logical development and solid support of your thesis
• errors in quotations or in references

You may make major revisions in the organization or content of your review during the revision process. Revising can even lead to a radical change in your central thesis.

NOTE: Prepared by University of Toronto Mississauga Library, Hazel McCallion Academic Learning Centre.

• << Previous: Writing Resources
• Next: Annotated Bibliography >>

Additional Resources

Writing a Critical Review (Allyson Skene, The Writing Centre, U of Toronto at Scarborough)

The Book Review or Article Critique (Margaret Procter, Writing Support, University of Toronto)

Critical Reviews of Journal Articles (Herbert Coutts, University of Alberta)

Writing a Critical Review (The Writing Centre, Queen's University)

• Last Updated: Aug 22, 2024 2:41 PM
• Subjects: Multidisciplinary

Write a Critical Review

What is a critical review, what should my first steps be in writing a critical review, parts of a critical review, resources to help with writing your essay.

• Parts of a Critical Review

Ask Us: Chat, email, visit or call

More writing resources

• Check out our full list of online writing resources These guides, templates, and videos are designed to help academic writers at various stages of their writing process, including the pre-writing and revising stages.

Get assistance

The library offers a range of helpful services.  All of our appointments are free of charge and confidential.

• Book an appointment

A critical review is a description and evaluation of a source, usually a journal article or book. It moves beyond a summary to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the source and to comment on the quality of the source as a whole.

• Do not be confused by the term “critical”: it does not mean that you only look at the negative aspects of what the researcher has done. You should address both the positive and negative aspects.

Some instructors will use these words to refer to a critical review: 

• Critical analysis 
• Article or book report
• Article or book review
• Read the article or book carefully
• Briefly summarize the main point and key details of the source
• Originality (e.g. Does the study address a clear gap in the previously existing literature or in the field of study?) 
• Reliability (e.g. Is the article or book peer reviewed? Is it free of author bias?)
• Validity (e.g. Is the study repeatable? Are the research results generalizable?)
• Relevance (e.g. Is the research well connected or related to other research in the field? Does it make a useful or timely contribution?)
• Presentation (e.g. Is the article or book well organized? Does the writing logically flow between sections, paragraphs, and sentences? 
• Analyze the strengths and weaknesses to determine the source’s overall value and contribution to the area of study. 
• The specific purpose, length, and amount of research will vary from assignment to assignment.
• Some, but not all, critical reviews will require you to support your ideas with information from other sources. 
• Introduction
• How can I Improve my Critical Review?

• Library Help Videos On YouTube
• How to Read an Article (Video)
• Next: Parts of a Critical Review >>
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 1:53 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uoguelph.ca/CriticalReview

Suggest an edit to this guide

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

• Memberships
• Institutional Members
• Teacher Members

Critical Review

by AEUK | May 13, 2024 | Critical thinking , Writing

Critical Review 

What is a critical review.

In very simply terms, a critical review or appraisal is an academic review of an article that offers both a summary and critical comment. Book reviews, movie reviews, critical reviews and literature reviews all perform a similar task of evaluating or appraising how well various texts and artistic productions achieve their goals of communicating with the reader, or a wider audience ( Charles Strut University, 2024. )

A critical review (sometimes called a critique, critical commentary, critical appraisal, critical analysis) is a detailed commentary on and critical evaluation of a text. To be critical does not mean to criticise in an exclusively negative manner. To be critical of a text means you question the information and opinions in the text, in an attempt to evaluate or judge its worth overall ( University of Southampton, 2024) .

A critical review is not just a summary. It is an evaluation of what an author has said about a topic. It is critical in the sense that it is a thoughtful consideration of the validity and accuracy of the author’s claims; considers the benefits and limitations of the author’s point of view; and identifies other valid points of view ( Monash University, 2024 ).

A critical review usually includes the following parts: Summary (What is the text about?), a critical analysis & evaluation (both positive and negative evaluations, e.g. What does the text contribute to the field? What are the limitations of the writer’s approach/conclusions?), and a recommendation (in light of your analysis and evaluation, how should others view this text?) ( Western Sydney University, 2024 ).

How to write a critical review video

A short video on academic writing.

Video Worksheet: click here

A critical review outline.

A critical review usually contains four parts:

• Introduction
• Summary of main ideas
• Evaluation (the critique)

Evaluation Focus Questions

This is a set of critical questions to think about when reading or listening to a text. These questions help to focus on the key areas to critique.

Evaluation Phrases

A set of evaluation phrases that can be used to signal positive and negative areas in a text.

Critical Review Download

Critical review: how to write a critical review (new 2024).

This lesson provides students with the knowledge and practice on how to write a critical review. It includes university critical review definitions, a four-part structure critical review outline, evaluation questions, evaluation phrases, a critical review essay analysis and writing practice. Example . Level: ** * ** [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

£5.50 – Add to cart Checkout Added to cart

Critical  Analysis Reading Texts

Text analysis 1: going to university, text analysis 1: going to university (updated 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘going to university’ with over 15 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

£6.50 – Add to cart Checkout Added to cart

Text analysis 2: cost-of-living crisis, text analysis 2: cost-of-living crisis (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘the cost-of-living crisis’ with over 18 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

Text Analysis 3:  Climate Change

Text analysis 3: climate change: the turning point (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘Climate Change’ with over 24 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

Text Analysis 4: Climate Change

Text analysis 4: population growth (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘population growth’ with over 20 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

Text Analysis 5: Data Centres

Text analysis 5: data centres (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘data centres’ with over 26 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .   Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

      Memberships (Teacher / Institutional)

      Full access to everything -  £100 /  £200 /   £550

  Join today * x

More Blog Articles…

Advertisement:

Which review is that? A guide to review types

• Which review is that?
• Review Comparison Chart
• Decision Tool

Critical Review

• Integrative Review
• Narrative Review
• State of the Art Review
• Narrative Summary
• Systematic Review
• Meta-analysis
• Comparative Effectiveness Review
• Diagnostic Systematic Review
• Network Meta-analysis
• Prognostic Review
• Psychometric Review
• Review of Economic Evaluations
• Systematic Review of Epidemiology Studies
• Living Systematic Reviews
• Umbrella Review
• Review of Reviews
• Rapid Review
• Rapid Evidence Assessment
• Rapid Realist Review
• Qualitative Evidence Synthesis
• Qualitative Interpretive Meta-synthesis
• Qualitative Meta-synthesis
• Qualitative Research Synthesis
• Framework Synthesis - Best-fit Framework Synthesis
• Meta-aggregation
• Meta-ethnography
• Meta-interpretation
• Meta-narrative Review
• Meta-summary
• Thematic Synthesis
• Mixed Methods Synthesis
• Narrative Synthesis
• Bayesian Meta-analysis
• EPPI-Centre Review
• Critical Interpretive Synthesis
• Realist Synthesis - Realist Review
• Scoping Review
• Mapping Review
• Systematised Review
• Concept Synthesis
• Expert Opinion - Policy Review
• Technology Assessment Review
• Methodological Review
• Systematic Search and Review

"A critical review aims to demonstrate that the writer has extensively researched the literature and critically evaluated its quality. It goes beyond mere description of identified articles and includes a degree of analysis and conceptual innovation" and "an effective critical review presents, analyses and synthesizes material from diverse sources". "There is no formal requirement to present methods of the search, synthesis and analysis explicitly" (Grant & Booth 2009).

Further Reading/Resources  

Cooper, Harris M & Cooper, Harris M. Synthesizing research (2017). Research synthesis and meta-analysis : a step-by-step approach (Fifth edition). SAGE Publications, Los Angeles Catalogue Link  

Renate Kahlke , Mark Lee , Kevin W. Eva; Building Blocks for Critical Reviews in Health Professions Education. J Grad Med Educ 1 April 2023; 15 (2): 186–189. doi: https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-23-00155.1

Paré G, Kitsiou S. Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews. In: Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27.  Full text

Younas, A., & Maddigan, J. (2019). Proposing a policy framework for nursing education for fostering compassion in nursing students: A critical review.  Journal of advanced nursing ,  75 (8), 1621–1636. Full Text Rew, L., Young, C. C., Monge, M., & Bogucka, R. (2021). Review: Puberty blockers for transgender and gender diverse youth-a critical review of the literature.  Child and adolescent mental health ,  26 (1), 3–14. Full Text  

References Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health information & libraries journal , 26 (2), 91-108. Full Text

• << Previous: Traditional review family
• Next: Integrative Review >>
• Last Updated: Aug 19, 2024 1:08 PM
• URL: https://unimelb.libguides.com/whichreview

How to write a critical review

Our guide on what it means to think critically when assessing a piece of writing for a student assignment or a workplace project.

When an academic assignment asks you to “critically review” or include a “critical analysis” of the work of other people, it generally means that you’ll need to “think critically”. This means analysing and assessing the work in terms of what the author was trying to achieve, the approach they took, how they conducted the research, and whether the outcomes were valid and acceptable. 

A critical review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of an item’s ideas and content. It provides description, analysis and interpretation that assess the item’s value. It’s an exercise that can be carried out on many different types of writing, but is most often carried out on a report, a book or a journal article. 

Thousands of publications relevant to HR appear every year, via established journals, websites, management consultancy reports and universities all over the world. With so much information becoming available, many of which offer new ideas, new HR theories and approaches, it’s important that HR practitioners can evaluate whether what they read is valid, sound and unbiased. We can’t take everything we read at face value, and it’s an important skill, and a very important activity to conduct, if you’re going to base corporate change and your proposals to management on information from published sources. 

On this page

Selecting an item to review, the critical review process, writing the critical review, useful contacts and books, view our other study guides.

For study purposes, it's likely that you'll be asked to carry out a critical review of one or more journal articles. You may be directed to a specific journal article, or asked to select one based on your own research on a particular topic, or on a topic of your choice.  

If you're given options to make a choice, you're more likely to achieve the required outcome if you use well-known academic journals. These might be found in a library, on HR websites such as HR Focus, or via any online journal hosting service, such as EBSCO which is provided free to CIPD members.  

An article will only be useful for a critical review assignment if the author has stated what the question was, how the research was done and the outcomes or conclusions based on the facts and evidence listed.  

What is a journal?  

A journal (sometimes also called a “ periodical ” ) is a publication produced on a regular continuing basis – it may be weekly, monthly, quarterly (every three months) or annually.  

The titles of journals (for example The Journal of Occupational Psychology ) indicate the main topic focus of the articles contained in it.  

As they are published regularly, journals usually have volume and issue numbers, and sometimes months, to identify them.  

A volume usually covers a specific year – so, for example, volume 45 may be all the issues published in 2013.  

A n issue number refers to a specific instalment of the journal within that volume – they are often numbered issue or number 1, 2, 3, etc.  

A s well as, or instead of, a volume and issue number, some journals use the month of publication. This information is often crucial in finding specific articles.  

There are two main types of journal :  

Academic journal (also called scholarly journals) – T hese often contain research articles written by subject experts; they contain academic commentary and critical evaluation of issues by experts. The articles will be written in an academic style and they may be “ refereed ” or “ peer-reviewed ” – that is they articles are assessed, often by members of an editorial board who are experts in the field, before they are accepted for publication. Articles from this type of journal are usually suitable for a critical review exercise. The International Journal of Human Resource Management and Harvard Business Review are examples.  

Trade or professional journals – T hese usually contain news articles and comment on current issues. The articles often contain practical information and are written in everyday language. They also often have a “ jobs ” section and news of people in that profession. They are likely to be written by journalists rather than academics and don't usually have such rigorous publishing criteria. These articles may not be so suitable for a critical review exercise. People Management is an example.  

Take time to:  

Think about what content are you expecting, based on the title?  

Read the abstract for a summary of the author's arguments.  

Study the list of references to determine what research contributed to the author's arguments. Are the references recent? Do they represent important work in the field by accredited authors?  

Find out more about the author to learn what authority they have to write about the subject. Have they published other works which have been peer-assessed by other experts?  

Read the article carefully, but straight-through the first time to form an impression. You may find it useful to note down your initial reactions and questions. Then re-read it, either right-through or in sections, taking notes of the key ideas. Use these questions as a framework.  

Who was the article written for?  

Why has the author written the article? To survey and summarise research on a topic? Or to present an argument that builds on past research? Or to disagree with another writer’s stated argument?  

Does the author define important terms?  

Is the information in the article fact or opinion? Facts can be verified, while opinions arise from perceptions and interpretation.  

Is the article well-structured? Is it organised logically and easy to follow?  

Is the information well-researched, or is it largely unsupported?  

What are the author’s central arguments or conclusions? Are they supported by evidence and analysis?  

If the article reports on an experiment or study, does the author clearly outline methodology and the expected result?  

Is the article lacking any information or arguments that you expected to find?  

For more on effective reading and note-taking, see our guide on studying effectively.  

A key part of a critical review is assessing the author's “argument”. In this context, the argument is the line of reasoning or the approach or point of view of the author. It may be the author is defending a particular idea. They may be trying to make a case for something, perhaps a new idea, in which case there would then need to be evidence, examples and a clear set of conclusions coming from the research, or investigation done. To be academically acceptable, any outcomes stated should not be just the author's ideas alone, they must be backed up with valid, appropriate evidence.  

Questions to ask yourself about the item you're reviewing are:  

Is there a logical progression through the argument?  

Do you feel the argument is strong enough?  

Is there enough valid evidence?  

Does the author make any assumptions and, if so, are they reasonable?  

Are any surveys valid – for example, is the sample size representative and large enough for any conclusions to be valid?  

Would the findings and conclusions apply to other organisations, or are they too specific? Why?  

Do you think the author was biased? Why? For example, it can be useful to think about who funded the research and whether could that have influenced the findings.  

It's important to remember that you don't need to agree with the author's views – this would form part of your critical thinking.  

A key skill when thinking critically is to be objective in what you are reading or thinking through. Look at both sides of the argument, think of some tests you could do to establish if the ideas are sound. You might apply them to your own organisation for instance.  

The output from critical thinking in a professional context is usually a report – a critical review of the item(s) chosen for a given purpose (for example, as student assignment or, in a work setting, to a project team).  

The steps are to:  

Select your area for review, and the reason for choosing it.  

Identify the different information sources reviewed, naming type, when accessed, and through which online database or source.  

Explain why you chose these source(s) to review (unless they were given to you).  

Highlight and comment on the different research approaches and methods used by the author(s).  

Comment on the argument and conclusions, drawing where necessary on your wider research.  

If required, make recommendations to named stakeholders for sustaining or improving practice, based on the findings in your sources.

Open University – critical reading techniques  

Open University – critically processing what you read  

Palgrave Study Skills – critical thinking  

CAMERON, S. (2009) The business student's handbook: skills for study and employment . 5th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.  

COTTRELL, S. (2013) The study skills handbook . 4th ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.  

COTTRELL, S. (2011) Critical thinking skills . 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.  

HORN. R. (2009) The business skills handbook . London: CIPD.  

NORTHEDGE, A. (2005) The good study guide . 2nd ed. Milton Keynes: Open University.  

OPEN UNIVERSITY. (2007) Develop effective study strategies . Milton Keynes: Open University

Our guide to helping you compile bibliographies based on the Harvard system.

There are a number of key considerations when developing an approach to studying to suit you. These study tips will help ensure you study effectively.

Practical advice on the report-writing process, with key steps to improve the quality of business reports

An academic essay is a formal piece of writing which presents an argument to the reader. Learn how to write persuasive and robust academic essays.

Our online Community

A place to learn, debate and connect with other HR and L&D professionals

More on this topic

Interactive career tools, including career assessments, personal development planner, elevator pitch builder, and interview simulator.

Supporting CIPD members in successful job search

Listen to our webinar to hear how our new qualifications could give you the skills and knowledge you need to excel in the people profession.

Latest guides

Advice on how to manage your wellbeing when working in HR

Clear and practical advice on the proper use of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) or confidentiality clauses and how to avoid inappropriate use

What this practice is, why you should avoid it, and how to approach it if no other options are available

Practical advice for managers on tackling sexual harassment in the workplace

• All eBooks & Audiobooks
• Academic eBook Collection
• Home Grown eBook Collection
• Off-Campus Access
• Literature Resource Center
• Opposing Viewpoints
• ProQuest Central
• Course Guides
• Citing Sources
• Library Research
• Websites by Topic
• Book-a-Librarian
• Research Tutorials
• Use the Catalog
• Use Databases
• Use Films on Demand
• Use Home Grown eBooks
• Use NC LIVE
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary vs. Secondary
• Scholarly vs. Popular
• Make an Appointment
• Writing Tools
• Annotated Bibliographies
• Summaries, Reviews & Critiques
• Writing Center

Service Alert

Article Summaries, Reviews & Critiques

• Writing an article SUMMARY
• Writing an article REVIEW

Writing an article CRITIQUE

• Citing Sources This link opens in a new window
• About RCC Library

Text: 336-308-8801

Email: [email protected]

Call: 336-633-0204

Schedule: Book-a-Librarian

Like us on Facebook

Links on this guide may go to external web sites not connected with Randolph Community College. Their inclusion is not an endorsement by Randolph Community College and the College is not responsible for the accuracy of their content or the security of their site.

A critique asks you to evaluate an article and the author’s argument. You will need to look critically at what the author is claiming, evaluate the research methods, and look for possible problems with, or applications of, the researcher’s claims.

Introduction

Give an overview of the author’s main points and how the author supports those points. Explain what the author found and describe the process they used to arrive at this conclusion.

Body Paragraphs

Interpret the information from the article:

• Does the author review previous studies? Is current and relevant research used?
• What type of research was used – empirical studies, anecdotal material, or personal observations?
• Was the sample too small to generalize from?
• Was the participant group lacking in diversity (race, gender, age, education, socioeconomic status, etc.)
• For instance, volunteers gathered at a health food store might have different attitudes about nutrition than the population at large.
• How useful does this work seem to you? How does the author suggest the findings could be applied and how do you believe they could be applied?
• How could the study have been improved in your opinion?
• Does the author appear to have any biases (related to gender, race, class, or politics)?
• Is the writing clear and easy to follow? Does the author’s tone add to or detract from the article?
• How useful are the visuals (such as tables, charts, maps, photographs) included, if any? How do they help to illustrate the argument? Are they confusing or hard to read?
• What further research might be conducted on this subject?

Try to synthesize the pieces of your critique to emphasize your own main points about the author’s work, relating the researcher’s work to your own knowledge or to topics being discussed in your course.

From the Center for Academic Excellence (opens in a new window), University of Saint Joseph Connecticut

Additional Resources

All links open in a new window.

Writing an Article Critique (from The University of Arizona Global Campus Writing Center)

How to Critique an Article (from Essaypro.com)

How to Write an Article Critique (from EliteEditing.com.au)

• << Previous: Writing an article REVIEW
• Next: Citing Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 15, 2024 9:32 AM
• URL: https://libguides.randolph.edu/summaries

• Jump to menu
• Student Home
• Accept your offer
• How to enrol
• Student ID card
• Set up your IT
• Orientation Week
• Fees & payment
• Academic calendar
• Special consideration
• Transcripts
• The Nucleus: Student Hub
• Referencing
• Essay writing
• Learning abroad & exchange
• Professional development & UNSW Advantage
• Employability
• Financial assistance
• International students
• Equitable learning
• Postgraduate research
• Health Service
• Events & activities
• Emergencies
• Volunteering
• Clubs and societies
• Accommodation
• Health services
• Sport and gym
• Arc student organisation
• Security on campus
• Maps of campus
• Careers portal
• Change password

Structure of a Critical Review

Critical reviews, both short (one page) and long (four pages), usually have a similar structure. Check your assignment instructions for formatting and structural specifications. Headings are usually optional for longer reviews and can be helpful for the reader.

Introduction

The length of an introduction is usually one paragraph for a journal article review and two or three paragraphs for a longer book review. Include a few opening sentences that announce the author(s) and the title, and briefly explain the topic of the text. Present the aim of the text and summarise the main finding or key argument. Conclude the introduction with a brief statement of your evaluation of the text. This can be a positive or negative evaluation or, as is usually the case, a mixed response.

Present a summary of the key points along with a limited number of examples. You can also briefly explain the author’s purpose/intentions throughout the text and you may briefly describe how the text is organised. The summary should only make up about a third of the critical review.

The critique should be a balanced discussion and evaluation of the strengths, weakness and notable features of the text. Remember to base your discussion on specific criteria. Good reviews also include other sources to support your evaluation (remember to reference).

You can choose how to sequence your critique. Here are some examples to get you started:

• Most important to least important conclusions you make about the text.
• If your critique is more positive than negative, then present the negative points first and the positive last.
• If your critique is more negative than positive, then present the positive points first and the negative last.
• If there are both strengths and weakness for each criterion you use, you need to decide overall what your judgement is. For example, you may want to comment on a key idea in the text and have both positive and negative comments. You could begin by stating what is good about the idea and then concede and explain how it is limited in some way. While this example shows a mixed evaluation, overall you are probably being more negative than positive.
• In long reviews, you can address each criterion you choose in a paragraph, including both negative and positive points. For very short critical reviews (one page or less), where your comments will be briefer, include a paragraph of positive aspects  and another of negative.
• You can also include recommendations for how the text can be improved in terms of ideas, research approach; theories or frameworks used can also be included in the critique section.

Conclusion & References

This is usually a very short paragraph.

• Restate your overall opinion of the text.
• Briefly present recommendations.
• If necessary, some further qualification or explanation of your judgement can be included. This can help your critique sound fair and reasonable.

If you have used other sources in you review you should also include a list of references at the end of the review.

Summarising and paraphrasing for the critical review

The best way to summarise

• Scan the text. Look for information that can be deduced from the introduction, conclusion, title, and headings. What do these tell you about the main points of the article?
• Locate the topic sentences and highlight the main points as you read.
• Reread the text and make separate notes of the main points. Examples and evidence do not need to be included at this stage. Usually they are used selectively in your critique.

Paraphrasing means putting it into your own words. Paraphrasing offers an alternative to using direct quotations in your summary (and the critique) and can be an efficient way to integrate your summary notes.

The best way to paraphrase

• Review your summary notes
• Rewrite them in your own words and in complete sentences
• Use reporting verbs and phrases, e.g. 'The author describes…', 'Smith argues that …'.
• Use quotation marks if If you include unique or specialist phrases from the text.

  Next: Some general criteria for evaluating texts

Essay and assignment writing guide.

• Essay writing basics
• Essay and assignment planning
• Answering assignment questions
• Editing checklist
• Structure of a critical review
• General criteria for evaluating
• Sample extracts
• Annotated bibliography
• Reflective writing
• ^ More support

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Turk J Urol
• v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a review article?

In the medical sciences, the importance of review articles is rising. When clinicians want to update their knowledge and generate guidelines about a topic, they frequently use reviews as a starting point. The value of a review is associated with what has been done, what has been found and how these findings are presented. Before asking ‘how,’ the question of ‘why’ is more important when starting to write a review. The main and fundamental purpose of writing a review is to create a readable synthesis of the best resources available in the literature for an important research question or a current area of research. Although the idea of writing a review is attractive, it is important to spend time identifying the important questions. Good review methods are critical because they provide an unbiased point of view for the reader regarding the current literature. There is a consensus that a review should be written in a systematic fashion, a notion that is usually followed. In a systematic review with a focused question, the research methods must be clearly described. A ‘methodological filter’ is the best method for identifying the best working style for a research question, and this method reduces the workload when surveying the literature. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The ideal way to synthesize studies is to perform a meta-analysis. In conclusion, when writing a review, it is best to clearly focus on fixed ideas, to use a procedural and critical approach to the literature and to express your findings in an attractive way.

The importance of review articles in health sciences is increasing day by day. Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines. [ 1 , 2 ] The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these researches. [ 3 ] As is the case with all other researches, the value of a review article is related to what is achieved, what is found, and the way of communicating this information. A few studies have evaluated the quality of review articles. Murlow evaluated 50 review articles published in 1985, and 1986, and revealed that none of them had complied with clear-cut scientific criteria. [ 4 ] In 1996 an international group that analyzed articles, demonstrated the aspects of review articles, and meta-analyses that had not complied with scientific criteria, and elaborated QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) statement which focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. [ 5 ] Later on this guideline was updated, and named as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). [ 6 ]

Review articles are divided into 2 categories as narrative, and systematic reviews. Narrative reviews are written in an easily readable format, and allow consideration of the subject matter within a large spectrum. However in a systematic review, a very detailed, and comprehensive literature surveying is performed on the selected topic. [ 7 , 8 ] Since it is a result of a more detailed literature surveying with relatively lesser involvement of author’s bias, systematic reviews are considered as gold standard articles. Systematic reviews can be diivded into qualitative, and quantitative reviews. In both of them detailed literature surveying is performed. However in quantitative reviews, study data are collected, and statistically evaluated (ie. meta-analysis). [ 8 ]

Before inquring for the method of preparation of a review article, it is more logical to investigate the motivation behind writing the review article in question. The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements:

• The question(s) to be dealt with
• Methods used to find out, and select the best quality researches so as to respond to these questions.
• To synthetize available, but quite different researches

For the specification of important questions to be answered, number of literature references to be consulted should be more or less determined. Discussions should be conducted with colleagues in the same area of interest, and time should be reserved for the solution of the problem(s). Though starting to write the review article promptly seems to be very alluring, the time you spend for the determination of important issues won’t be a waste of time. [ 9 ]

The PRISMA statement [ 6 ] elaborated to write a well-designed review articles contains a 27-item checklist ( Table 1 ). It will be reasonable to fulfill the requirements of these items during preparation of a review article or a meta-analysis. Thus preparation of a comprehensible article with a high-quality scientific content can be feasible.

PRISMA statement: A 27-item checklist

Contents and format

Important differences exist between systematic, and non-systematic reviews which especially arise from methodologies used in the description of the literature sources. A non-systematic review means use of articles collected for years with the recommendations of your colleagues, while systematic review is based on struggles to search for, and find the best possible researches which will respond to the questions predetermined at the start of the review.

Though a consensus has been reached about the systematic design of the review articles, studies revealed that most of them had not been written in a systematic format. McAlister et al. analyzed review articles in 6 medical journals, and disclosed that in less than one fourth of the review articles, methods of description, evaluation or synthesis of evidence had been provided, one third of them had focused on a clinical topic, and only half of them had provided quantitative data about the extend of the potential benefits. [ 10 ]

Use of proper methodologies in review articles is important in that readers assume an objective attitude towards updated information. We can confront two problems while we are using data from researches in order to answer certain questions. Firstly, we can be prejudiced during selection of research articles or these articles might be biased. To minimize this risk, methodologies used in our reviews should allow us to define, and use researches with minimal degree of bias. The second problem is that, most of the researches have been performed with small sample sizes. In statistical methods in meta-analyses, available researches are combined to increase the statistical power of the study. The problematic aspect of a non-systematic review is that our tendency to give biased responses to the questions, in other words we apt to select the studies with known or favourite results, rather than the best quality investigations among them.

As is the case with many research articles, general format of a systematic review on a single subject includes sections of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion ( Table 2 ).

Structure of a systematic review

Preparation of the review article

Steps, and targets of constructing a good review article are listed in Table 3 . To write a good review article the items in Table 3 should be implemented step by step. [ 11 – 13 ]

Steps of a systematic review

The research question

It might be helpful to divide the research question into components. The most prevalently used format for questions related to the treatment is PICO (P - Patient, Problem or Population; I-Intervention; C-appropriate Comparisons, and O-Outcome measures) procedure. For example In female patients (P) with stress urinary incontinence, comparisons (C) between transobturator, and retropubic midurethral tension-free band surgery (I) as for patients’ satisfaction (O).

Finding Studies

In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.

Ideally, research methods, investigated databases, and key words should be described in the final report. Different databases are used dependent on the topic analyzed. In most of the clinical topics, Medline should be surveyed. However searching through Embase and CINAHL can be also appropriate.

While determining appropriate terms for surveying, PICO elements of the issue to be sought may guide the process. Since in general we are interested in more than one outcome, P, and I can be key elements. In this case we should think about synonyms of P, and I elements, and combine them with a conjunction AND.

One method which might alleviate the workload of surveying process is “methodological filter” which aims to find the best investigation method for each research question. A good example of this method can be found in PubMed interface of Medline. The Clinical Queries tool offers empirically developed filters for five different inquiries as guidelines for etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or clinical prediction.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Study

As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible. To achieve this goal you should know the best possible evidence for each type of question The first component of the quality is its general planning/design of the study. General planning/design of a cohort study, a case series or normal study demonstrates variations.

A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4 . However this hierarchy is only a first step. After you find good quality research articles, you won’t need to read all the rest of other articles which saves you tons of time. [ 14 ]

Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question

Formulating a Synthesis

Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. In this case a solution should be found. However it is risky to make a decision based on the votes of absolute majority. Indeed, a well-performed large scale study, and a weakly designed one are weighed on the same scale. Therefore, ideally a meta-analysis should be performed to solve apparent differences. Ideally, first of all, one should be focused on the largest, and higher quality study, then other studies should be compared with this basic study.

Conclusions

In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1) Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective. 2) Research articles in the literature should be approached with a methodological, and critical attitude and 3) finally data should be explained in an attractive way.

How to Write a Critical Review of an Article

Need to write a critical review but unsure of where to start? Don’t worry, it’s normal to feel stuck when writing a critical review.

So, how should you approach a critical review? Well, you need to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the article. But, more than this, you need to draw links between this article and other relevant papers. This is important if you want a first-class grade!

Critical reviews are difficult, but they can help you improve your research and selection skills. That said, let’s explore how to write a critical review of an article.

How to be ‘critical’

First and foremost, be clear on what it means to be ‘critical’. If you’ve read our guide on how to critically discuss , you’ll know that being critical isn’t just about being negative.

Being critical means weighing up the strengths and weaknesses of a particular piece of work and considering its implications and applications from various perspectives.

That said, in order to ‘be critical’ you must:

• Fully immerse yourself in the work(s) you are critiquing.
• Keep an open, balanced mind.

Why critically review an article?

Understanding why your tutor has set this piece of work can help you to feel more motivated to finish it. So, why would your tutor ask you to critically review an article?

Well, being able to critically appraise others’ work is considered essential to thrive as a student. This is especially true if you want to progress to master’s or PhD level study.

Writing a critical review can help you to become a more discerning researcher, because it teaches you how to appraise other people’s work.

If you can become good at critically appraising one paper, you can become good at appraising a bunch of papers. So, this means that when writing subsequent essays, you can accurately discern which research papers are worth including in your essays, and which are not.

Not to mention, an assignment like this also introduces you to the practice of peer-review; another practice that is central to UK academia.

What should I include?

The expectation of what a critical review should include will vary between subjects. As a rough guide, it should include the following:

A brief overview of the content

Generally, you should assume that your reader has not read the article, so you will need to include a brief description of its content. Remember to be brief in order to leave enough space for critique.

It’s up to you whether you write a short paragraph at the beginning of your review summarising the article, or whether you describe and critique the paper as you go along. The latter strategy can be more impressive, but it is more difficult to do.

Acknowledge (and critique) the author’s rationale

Ask yourself, why did the author(s) write this article? What problem or issue were they trying to solve? Ultimately, your review should say whether you agree that there was a problem to be solved, and whether you think this article has addressed this problem effectively.

So, for example, let’s say you need to review an article that tested whether putting stricter quotas on fishing can tackle the overfishing crisis.

First, ask yourself, is there enough evidence to confirm that we are facing an overfishing crisis? Use your response to this question to determine how ‘important’ you see this article to be.  Moreover, ask yourself, were the authors right to focus on stricter quotas as a potential solution, or could/should they have focused on something else?

Remember, you are not just critiquing the paper itself but the decisions (or rationale) that led the authors to formulate this type of paper in the first place.

Strengths and weaknesses of the methodology

Most critical reviews should discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology, since the choice of methodology relates to issues like reliability and validity.

When critiquing the methodology, ask yourself why you think the author(s) chose this approach. For example, if they chose to conduct qualitative interviews rather than administer a quantitative questionnaire, why do you think they did this?

Tip: Most journal articles have a section at the end where the authors discuss the limitations of their paper (including the methodology), so this can give you some hints if you’re struggling to find any weaknesses with the methodology.

Research methods is a broad area of study, so we strongly recommend you take out a research methods textbook from your university library; this will introduce you to the basics of different research methods which will help you to critique the article confidently.

Applications and future directions

Remember we said that a critical review shouldn’t only be negative? Indeed, you should generally say positive things about the article, too.

One way to do this is to consider alternative applications of the author’s theory or argument. So, let’s say that the paper found that caffeine helps improve people’s memory. You might wonder whether caffeine could be an effective treatment for memory disorders and recommend this as a potential avenue for future research.

Remember, one of the aims of a critical review is to ‘fit it in’ to the wider literature. This will show off your ability to draw links between theories, concepts, and disciplines.

Language and tone

Depending on the type of article you are reviewing, you might also want to comment on the language skills of the authors.

Have they presented their ideas coherently? Is the argument easy to follow? If you had written the article, would you have approached it differently? Under this remit, you might also consider the quality of presentation.

Questions to ask yourself when critiquing an article

As mentioned, your tutor might have some quite unique requirements for what to include in your review. But, generally speaking, these are some good questions to get you started:

• Is this article convincing?
• What part of this article is most/least convincing to me?
• Does this article solve a problem?
• Does this article oversimplify (or exaggerate) a problem?
• How would I summarise this article in one sentence? (write it down)
• Does this article support or refute previous research?
• Did the author(s) formulate a specific hypothesis? If so, what was it?
• Were the findings largely in-line with the author(s) predictions or were they surprising?
• If another researcher replicated this study, are they likely to find similar results? (e.g., if this study was done in a different country, or using a different medium, what influence might this have on the results?)
• When was this article written? Is it still relevant?
• What have other commentators said about this article?
• Does this article feel biased or balanced?

Should I reference other papers?

Your tutor will be able to tell you whether your critical review should include other references.

However it is a good idea to include additional references because this shows you can ‘fit’ this article into the ‘bigger picture’ and draw links between different theorists’ ideas.

Moreover, when making an evaluative statement about a particular weakness within the paper, including a citation can help you to appear more authoritative.

For example, let’s say you write ‘The authors only included 12 participants so the sample size was very small; this means the findings cannot be generalised’ (Smith, 2010).

By including a reference to Smith (2010), you are showing that you have read up about sampling and the effects of using a small sample size. This demonstrates that you have thought carefully about various aspects of the article and done your own research to critique it confidently.

Tips for getting started

As with all academic papers, getting started is often the hardest part. That said, here are some tips to help you kickstart your critical review:

• Fully immerse yourself in the article – try to read the paper through at least three times so you fully understand it. If you’re finding it hard to focus, see if you can find an audio version of the article. If you can’t find an official audio version, copy-and-paste the content into Word, click the ‘Review’ tab and then click ‘Read Aloud’.
• Tell someone else about the article – This is a great way of testing your comprehension of the article and can help to increase your motivation for finishing the assignment.
• Check out the reference list – The reference list of the article can be useful for finding relevant sources for contextualising the article, e.g., some of these references will likely refer to the opposing side of the debate (you need to engage with these too).
• Make notes – Make notes as you go, and you will find it much easier to write up your critical review later.

Writing a Critical Review

You are a student at Pomona College and you have been asked to write a critical review. Never mind the fact that you have probably never encountered such a thing, you just so happen to have a million and one other things to do. Fear not, this worksheet will get you through it.

What is a Critical Review?

A critical review, sometimes referred to as a critical book review, is a summary and analysis of the information and argument of a text in light of your own personal opinions. Those personal opinions, however, should be informed by what you have learned in class through readings, lectures, and discussions, along with any guidelines your professor may set.

How do I Write a Critical Review?

So, you have the prompt in one hand and this worksheet in another. Let’s get this critical review underway.

Step 1. Reread

To begin, you need to reread the material that you are supposed to review. How can you effectively critique a text that you can’t remember? Reread, my friend.

Step 2. Identifying Key Information

In order to sift through the mass of information that many readings are riddled with it is helpful to ask yourself a few framing questions.

• Who is the author’s intended audience?
• What major questions did the text address?
• What is the core issue?
• How is the text framed? As a gender analysis? Something else?
• How is it organized?
• Is the argument clearly demonstrated?
• What kind of evidence has the author used? Laboratory or clinical research? Surveys? Expert opinions?
• Have they used facts, opinions, both?
• Is their language or perspective neutral or biased?
• Is there an argument against something?
• Is there a bigger picture?
• Is there another way to examine the subject?
• Why does the author speak of or believe in what they do?
• Is the reasoning behind their argument sound?
• What do you know about this topic? Is it different from what the author is saying?
• Why did your teacher assign this reading?
• Summary of the article:
• You personal critique:
• Are there any questions you have concerning this work and the issue it addresses?
• Where might the discussion proceed?

Step 3. A Critical Review is 1/3 summary 2/3 your critique

As you summarize a text within your critical review, your professor is looking to see how well you have discussed important arguments, trends, ideas, and themes in light of your own thoughts and opinions. That means you are not to spend the whole review talking about what the author said and not following up with what you believe, whether you agree or not.

Remember, college writing insists that you come from behind the author and speak up for yourself.

Your critical review need not be a comprehensive report on the whole text, it just has to discuss a few main issues that you may have agreed, disagreed, or partially agreed/disagreed on.

Now that you have got a few guidelines on how to right a critical review, you can expect to have a solid paper. Remember, you are engaging in a conversation with the author of a text, don’t let the conversation become the author’s monologue! 

Mailing Address

Pomona College 333 N. College Way Claremont , CA 91711

Get in touch

Give back to pomona.

Part of   The Claremont Colleges

• Insights blog

What is a review article?

Learn how to write a review article.

What is a review article? A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results.

Writing a review of literature is to provide a critical evaluation of the data available from existing studies. Review articles can identify potential research areas to explore next, and sometimes they will draw new conclusions from the existing data.

Why write a review article?

To provide a comprehensive foundation on a topic.

To explain the current state of knowledge.

To identify gaps in existing studies for potential future research.

To highlight the main methodologies and research techniques.

Did you know? 

There are some journals that only publish review articles, and others that do not accept them.

Make sure you check the  aims and scope  of the journal you’d like to publish in to find out if it’s the right place for your review article.

How to write a review article

Below are 8 key items to consider when you begin writing your review article.

Check the journal’s aims and scope

Make sure you have read the aims and scope for the journal you are submitting to and follow them closely. Different journals accept different types of articles and not all will accept review articles, so it’s important to check this before you start writing.

Define your scope

Define the scope of your review article and the research question you’ll be answering, making sure your article contributes something new to the field. 

As award-winning author Angus Crake told us, you’ll also need to “define the scope of your review so that it is manageable, not too large or small; it may be necessary to focus on recent advances if the field is well established.” 

Finding sources to evaluate

When finding sources to evaluate, Angus Crake says it’s critical that you “use multiple search engines/databases so you don’t miss any important ones.” 

For finding studies for a systematic review in medical sciences,  read advice from NCBI . 

Writing your title, abstract and keywords

Spend time writing an effective title, abstract and keywords. This will help maximize the visibility of your article online, making sure the right readers find your research. Your title and abstract should be clear, concise, accurate, and informative. 

For more information and guidance on getting these right, read our guide to writing a good abstract and title  and our  researcher’s guide to search engine optimization . 

Introduce the topic

Does a literature review need an introduction? Yes, always start with an overview of the topic and give some context, explaining why a review of the topic is necessary. Gather research to inform your introduction and make it broad enough to reach out to a large audience of non-specialists. This will help maximize its wider relevance and impact. 

Don’t make your introduction too long. Divide the review into sections of a suitable length to allow key points to be identified more easily.

Include critical discussion

Make sure you present a critical discussion, not just a descriptive summary of the topic. If there is contradictory research in your area of focus, make sure to include an element of debate and present both sides of the argument. You can also use your review paper to resolve conflict between contradictory studies.

What researchers say

Angus Crake, researcher

As part of your conclusion, include making suggestions for future research on the topic. Focus on the goal to communicate what you understood and what unknowns still remains.

Use a critical friend

Always perform a final spell and grammar check of your article before submission. 

You may want to ask a critical friend or colleague to give their feedback before you submit. If English is not your first language, think about using a language-polishing service.

Find out more about how  Taylor & Francis Editing Services can help improve your manuscript before you submit.

What is the difference between a research article and a review article?

Before you submit your review article…

Complete this checklist before you submit your review article:

Have you checked the journal’s aims and scope?

Have you defined the scope of your article?

Did you use multiple search engines to find sources to evaluate?

Have you written a descriptive title and abstract using keywords?

Did you start with an overview of the topic?

Have you presented a critical discussion?

Have you included future suggestions for research in your conclusion?

Have you asked a friend to do a final spell and grammar check?

Expert help for your manuscript

Taylor & Francis Editing Services  offers a full range of pre-submission manuscript preparation services to help you improve the quality of your manuscript and submit with confidence.

Related resources

How to edit your paper

Writing a scientific literature review

• Open access
• Published: 29 August 2024

Towards equity & inclusion: a critical examination of genetic Counselling Education on Intersex Healthcare

• Adrienne B. Atayan 1 ,
• Katherine Huerne 2 ,
• Nicole Palmour 2 &
• Yann Joly 2  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  942 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Intersex describes a diversity of individuals with variations in sex characteristics (VSC), reflecting underlying differences in reproductive anatomy, hormones, and/or genes and chromosomes. With a shift towards socially-conscious clinical practices, genetic counsellors (GCs) are increasingly needing to provide comprehensive care to individuals with VSC and their families. However, the current quality of training provided to genetic counsellors on intersex health is unclear.

Qualitative interviews were conducted between Jan-Feb 2021 with 20 current and graduated students of Canadian GC training programs to assess the quality of GC education on intersex health topics. An agency-based model of VSC health as proposed by Crocetti et al. was used to guide the inductive thematic data analysis.

Results revealed three key themes: limited discussions on psychosocial considerations when caring for intersex individuals, enthusiasm for integrating more intersex training into the curriculum, and personal initiative in ensuring equity and justice in the care of individuals with VSC.

Conclusions

These findings demonstrate existing knowledge gaps in the GC curriculum, with a need to increase the profession’s overall awareness on intersex issues. GC training programs have an opportunity to meet the desires of students while promoting person-centered and validating healthcare for the intersex community.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Intersex variations and variations of sex characteristics (VSC) are umbrella terms used to describe individuals with congenital variations in sex characteristics and/or reproductive anatomy, reflecting underlying variations in genitalia, gonads, hormones, or genetic differences [ 1 , 2 ]. Most notably, it includes differences in sex chromosomes or single genes. The vocabulary surrounding intersex, disorders of sexual development (DSD), and variations of sex characteristics (VSC) has evolved, reflecting community perspectives and priorities [ 3 ] however medical texts often prefer the term DSD or will refer to the specific congenital variation falling under the intersex umbrella. It is estimated that intersex individuals represent approximately 1.7% of the general population [ 1 , 4 ]. Variations in sexual characteristics can be detected at different life stages (prenatally, at birth, during puberty, and adulthood) and healthcare providers (HCPs) engagement with intersex individuals can occur anywhere along this trajectory. Individuals with VSCs are culturally stigmatized, and report human rights violations and pathologization worldwide. These experiences translate to medical communication where many individuals report negative experiences as a result of their intersex status including misinformation and the concealment of personal medical information, [ 5 ] contributing to a culture of “secrecy and shame” [ 4 , 6 ], infringing on human rights of bodily integrity and self-determination, [ 7 ] and perpetuating the lack of social visibility of the intersex community [ 8 , 9 ].

Stigmatization may be perpetuated through apologetic or judgment-ridden language by HCPs at the time of identification of an intersex trait. In studies conducted by Jaramillo et al. [ 10 ] and Streuli et al. [ 11 ] they demonstrated that styles of pathologizing versus non-pathologizing communication by HCPs strongly influenced the decisions made by parents or parental proxies regarding the care of children with VSC. Continued stigmatization of VSC can stem from a lack of HCP awareness of potential trauma, uses of inappropriate terminology, [ 12 ] or knowledge gaps in understanding the needs of individuals with VSC [ 13 ]. Various advocates, allied health professionals, and international human rights bodies have called for movement away from a purely biomedical model of intersex, which centres around a dialogue of intersex variations as “abnormalities” or “disorders”, towards more neutral and accepting language and attend to psychosocial needs [ 9 ]. Moreover, the communication should focus on the health concerns, if relevant, rather than merely emphasize physical differences compared to the statistical norm. To complement this shift, patient-centred and rights-based models that emphasize the use of non-pathologizing language are encouraged [ 14 , 15 ].

Recommendations for improving intersex care often include the formation of multidisciplinary HCP teams to guide individuals with VSC and their families [ 6 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Within these teams, genetic counsellors (GCs) are suggested to take on roles in pediatric settings, such as educating patients and families on genetic etiologies of VSCs, providing outreach resources for children and adolescents with VSC, and providing parents with communication tools like letters to explain VSC to family members [ 20 , 21 , 22 ]. Genetic counselors facilitate individuals understanding and adaption to the medical, psychological, and familial implications of genetic contributions of particular differences that may impact health [ 23 ]. For intersex adults, GCs can also facilitate discussions about reproductive goals and fertility. Additionally, genetic counsellors have opportunities to encounter VSC topics in a prenatal setting. With the increasing availability of non-invasive prenatal genetic screening (NIPS), the detection of some VSC conditions related to sex chromosome aneuploidies are likely to increase [ 24 ]. Recent studies on NIPS for sex prediction call for guidance on pretest counseling from professional organizations, continuing education focused on sex and gender-diverse approaches to avoid stigma, anxiety and psychological harms [ 25 , 26 ]. This furthers the increasing need for GCs to be aware of social issues surrounding VSC and provide context specific, non-directive counselling [ 27 , 28 ].

Previous research has explored the perceived levels of competency and comfort of GCs when working with sexual orientation minorities such as gay, lesbian, bisexual patients, [ 29 ] or gender identity minorities such as transgender and non-binary patients [ 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]. While intersex variations are independent of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) research highlights the challenges of developing rapport and effective communication when professionals lack of vocabulary and ease utilizing the terminology [ 35 ]. Barnes, Tuite, and Sheehan all reflect on the lack of universally accepted standards to accurately represent the uniqueness of individual identities in healthcare settings, particularly with regards to the use of symbols in drawing pedigrees and family history intake during a genetic counseling (GC) encounter [ 31 , 33 , 36 ]. However, an important portion of intersex individuals do not identify themselves as belonging to a SOGI minority group. Furthermore, the distinct needs of individuals with VSC are not specifically examined in these studies, with both Barnes and Sheehan commenting on the need for intersex-focused research in genetic counselling settings in the future [ 31 , 33 ]. Broad themes encompassed in these studies also include the importance of using validating language, the responsibility of the counsellor to create a safe space for discussion, and the widespread desire for more education in working with these patient populations. Therefore, training focused on these topics would be valuable to GCs and students.

An initial approach to address the need for intersex-focused research in GC is to assess the current state of intersex education provided to GCs during their training. Despite calls for continuing education and guidance from professional organizations including the 2023 Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling (ACGC) standards, there are no specific requirements on the provision of training addressing the needs of situationally marginalized groups such as individuals with VSC [ 37 ]. Integrating the social and biomedical models of intersex health such as Crocetti et al.’s agency-based model will inform the analysis to examine the sociocultural constructions of medical treatment and management of intersex health and how this related to GC training in this space. This qualitative study aims to assess the experiences of Canadian GCs and students regarding their education and training (psychosocial and medical) on intersex individuals’ healthcare, related topics of variations of sexual characteristics and nuances of the specific counseling settings (prenatal, newborn, puberty and adulthood). Without a clearer understanding of the current knowledge gaps in VSC education, it is challenging to specify training competencies for GCs to provide patient-centred and validating healthcare for this patient community.

Study design

This study utilized an interview approach with thematic analysis to assess the richness of participants’ responses [ 38 ]. The approach was chosen as it compliments early stages of research with limited coverage in the existent field, while individual interviews allow for detailed discussions of the participant’s personal experiences, opinions, and reflections [ 39 ]. An agency-based model of intersex, or VSC health, as proposed by Crocetti et al. was used to guide the analysis [ 9 ]. It integrates both the social and biomedical models of intersex health to address health issues concerning individuals with VSCs, as well as the sociocultural constructions that guide the medical treatment of individuals with VSCs. Social model of intersex health is inspired by critical disability theory, which challenges the biomedical pathologization of intersex individuals, and recognizes that the ‘disabling’ aspect of intersex embodiment is a direct outcome of societal norms, prejudice, and discrimination [ 40 ].

Positionality statement

The authorship team includes authors who identify as queer, disabled, people of color, and as a parent of a nonbinary child. The authors also have a range of clinical, academic, legal and advocacy involvement with LGBTQIA + communities. The manuscript was supported by Social Sciences Research Council grant # 435-2018-0626 (Toward effective health communication with intersex Canadians: A study of ethical and legal challenges).

Ethics approval

Ethics approval for the study was obtained from McGill University’s Research Ethics Board in Winter 2020 (REF #20-11-054).

Eligibility criteria

Eligible participants included current students and recent graduates of Canadian genetic counselling programs. “Recent graduates” were defined as genetic counsellors who completed their training within the 5 years prior to the conduction of this study, including individuals from the graduating class of 2015. Exclusion criteria included having participated in the pilot interviews conducted during the design stage of the study.

Participant recruitment

Participants were recruited via purposeful sampling through email blasts sent by the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors (CAGC) to members registered on their listserv, as well as via emails from the Program Directors of Canadian genetic counselling programs to current students and alumni. The initial recruitment email included an invitation to connect with the researcher. The researcher contacted each participant to provide more information regarding the background of the study and a consent form. Participants were then scheduled for an individual interview in English on the video conference platform Zoom.

Data collection

Between January to February 2021, the researcher conducted 20 individual interviews using Zoom with participants in the location of their choice. Individual interviews lasted between 23 and 59 min (median: 39.8 min) each and were audio recorded. Throughout the interview process, care was taken to check in with the participants, to ensure they felt safe, and reduce the possibility of participant discomfort in discussing details related to intersex topics or related gender, sex, and sexuality minorities. Participants were extended the opportunity to decline answering any question or could withdraw from the study at any time without explanation.

Interview guide

The semi-structured interview guide (see Appendix ) was based on a review of existing literature exploring the experiences of genetic counsellors, [ 29 , 30 , 32 , 33 ] training related to counselling considerations for SOGI minorities, and intersex issues in general. Similar to Zayhowski et al., 2019, the interview guide provided structure for the formal interview, with open-ended questions and prompts allowing participants’ responses to follow trajectories of relevant topics as they emerged [ 41 ]. The interview guide was piloted by GC students who closely resembled the study’s intended demographic to maximize the content validity, assess the appropriateness of questions and estimate approximate interview length [ 42 ]. The final guide included 14 questions on the following topics: (a) education received and/or desired regarding intersex healthcare, (b) participants’ awareness of intersex issues, and (c) personal or extra-curricular experiences contributing to awareness of intersex issues. Questions related to participants’ demographics such as age, gender identity, pronouns, and student status (e.g., first-year, second-year, or recent graduate) were also asked.

Data analysis

Recordings of each interview were saved to an encrypted and password-protected laptop and sent for transcription by a third-party transcription service. Resulting transcripts were reviewed for accuracy, and participants’ names as well as any identifying information was deleted to maintain confidentiality. Transcripts of the interview were not returned to participants for comment or correction. Transcribed data from individual interviews were then uploaded into NVivo Version 20.6.1 (2020). The coding team consisted of the lead researcher (A.A), and two members of the research team with extensive familiarity in qualitative methodologies (N.P. and M.C.). A thematic codebook was developed using an inductive approach by independently identifying emergent concepts and highlighting representative quotes across the data set [ 43 ]. Coding of the transcripts occurred independently. Together, the team reviewed the coded transcripts. Once completed, the coding was compared to the codebook and differences were reconciled through iterative discussion to reach a consensus and identify overarching themes and subthemes.

An inductive thematic analysis was used, as it permitted the examination of patterns in participants’ perspectives and the generation of unanticipated themes without the application of a pre-existing framework [ 44 , 45 ]. The lead coder (A.A.) reviewed the raw data and assigned initial codes to recurrent patterns in the participants’ responses. These codes were then reviewed by the secondary coders (N.P and M.C.) and the codes were organized into broader themes that relate to the research questions. Participant checking was not employed in this project as there was limited time for the student led project. This report presents the emergent themes and how they relate to existent intersex education literature.

Participant characteristics

A total of 20 participants enrolled in the study, comprising 3 first-year students, 6 second-year students, and 11 recent graduates across 5 GC programs in Canada. The counselling programs were distributed between four provinces (two in Québec, one in each of Manitoba, British Columbia, and Ontario). All demographic information is listed in Table  1 .

Themes identified

The three major themes identified through thematic analysis include: (1) limited discussions of psychosocial aspects of intersex identity during training (2) enthusiasm towards integration of training specific to intersex issues into the curriculum and (3) collective responsibility of GCs in ensuring equity and undoing historic harms in the care of individuals with VSC.

Psychosocial aspects of intersex identity during training

Participants noted that the medical aspects of intersex were formally covered in course learning objectives and were discussed in depth. However, discussions on the psychosocial aspects of intersex identity and the impact of stigma occurred primarily in informal settings and were often initiated by interested students (rather than indicated by the curriculum). Most participants ( n  = 19) believed that medical topics related to intersex conditions (such as factors influencing diagnosis or clinical management) were addressed in formal lectures. Notably, the topics were predominantly conveyed using language of disorders of sex development (DSD) and taught by medical professionals (geneticists and/or GCs). Regarding clinical experience, several participants ( n  = 11) shared that they had limited or no exposure to cases involving intersex conditions and/or variations of sexual characteristics. By contrast, discussions on psychosocial issues related to intersex identity, ethical considerations (e.g., patient autonomy, self-determination, and bodily integrity), adaptations in counselling strategies emerged in informal group discussions, and debriefing clinical cases with fellow students were raised through student-led presentations ( n  = 13). Many participants ( n  = 19) commented that intersex topics were included within the broader context of training related to SOGI minority groups. However, it meant that intersex issues were rarely, if ever, treated as a distinct entity in formal training. Notably, three participants recounted instances during training when a GC student experienced resistance and backlash from medical residents and physicians in response to a presentation delivered by a peer GC student. The presentation sought to analyze an article which criticized certain practices in the care of infants or fetuses with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), a condition that can be categorized under the umbrella of intersex. All three participants described feeling uneasy with the situation, with one participant saying that they felt it was unfortunate that the burden of initiating discourse on potentially charged topics often fell onto students.

Integration of intersex-specific training into the curriculum

All 20 participants expressed positive attitudes about incorporating more intersex topics into training, and a diversity of responses emerged from participants upon being prompted to expand on these sentiments of support towards additional training in this domain. Some wanted a curriculum that provided formal introduction to intersex topics, as well as addressing misconceptions of what intersex is and is not. A few ( n  = 11) cautioned on assuming incoming students would have a baseline knowledge of intersex topics and the lived experiences of intersex individuals (due to the increasing social advocacy of the intersex community), as it assumes that students already understand how to approach these topics with patients. Interestingly, a few participants ( n  = 10) touched on how the assumed transferability of strategies for counselling from one patient population to another may create unintentional gaps in training. These responses reflected on adjustments in counselling approaches when working with different marginalized populations - participants shared that counselling considerations for groups such as SOGI minorities, patients (or parents of a child) with Down syndrome, or the disability community may have been covered in classes, but no explicit considerations specific to intersex counselling were included in training.

Participants proposed novel and diverse formats of training and education devoted to intersex issues (such as role-playing, simulated sessions, or workshops), training regarding language considerations, pedigree nomenclature to represent diverse patient identities, as well as opportunities for advocacy and affirming care in clinical settings (e.g., terminology used in medical documentation, inclusiveness in questionnaires and forms, etc.). Overwhelmingly, all participants placed a high degree of value in directly learning from the intersex community to have a better understanding of the perspective of this patient group. A few participants ( n  = 5) suggested opportunities for programs to invite patient representatives and/or intersex advocates to speak and present to students.

Ensuring equity and undoing historic harms in the care of individuals with VSC

Participants reflected on the roles of GCs in advocacy and undoing historic harms experienced by the intersex community, tying it to equity and responsibility to provide services to an underrepresented population which faces stigmatization and systemic barriers to quality healthcare.

Participants identified opportunities for GCs to be involved at many points in an intersex individual’s care throughout their lifetime (prenatal, pediatric, adult and fertility genetics). Many ( n  = 13) respondents detailed various considerations in a counsellor’s role in the prenatal setting when discussing intersex traits and variations of sexual characteristics with prospective parents. “We can go into a counselling session with someone who is from a different culture and have some idea of values and issues that we might want to bring up and see if that’s influencing decision making or, you know, accepting or adjusting to a diagnosis.” All participants described feeling confident in their ability to provide non-directive counselling, regardless of whether they had previously participated in the care of an intersex patient.

Uncertainty

However, some identified areas of uncertainty in their approach or delivery of information. One participant commented that “it is not a challenge to be non-directive, but in some cases, it can be more complex,” acknowledging that they would feel a level of discomfort if a couple expressed wanting to terminate a pregnancy based on variations of sexual characteristics, without the presence of significant medical complications. A separate respondent expressed that a similar situation would create a conflict with their internal values, sharing that they would be “torn between wearing my counselling hat and my advocacy hat.”

Mitigating strategies

Many participants ( n  = 13) expressed a desire to spend time thoroughly preparing for a consultation involving intersex in a prenatal setting. Almost half of the participants ( n  = 9) emphasized the dilemma of wanting to present a more balanced and nuanced perspective on the quality of life of intersex individuals or those with VSCs, without having had a previous exposure to this information in training or in clinical practice. Several participants ( n  = 16) anticipated the types of strategies they might use to address these challenges in a GC session. For example, being aware of how tone and language affects the decision-making process when discussing VSC topics, how a couple might perceive a child with VSC, or how that person or family may go on to interact with the healthcare system. Other participants commented on possible benefits of “front-loading” assessments of their patients’ values and beliefs at the beginning of a session to best adapt to their needs ( n  = 2). One respondent expanded on this, stating that it was important to be aware that discussions which challenge patients’ sociocultural beliefs on sex and/or gender binary can be polarizing. Finally, a few participants ( n  = 3) warned against over-emphasizing intersexuality as a dimension of a person’s identity and/or “creating a centrepiece” out of variations of sexual characteristics as this may perpetuate stigmatization, despite an underlying intention to be open and inclusive.

Summary of findings

These interviews elucidated the perspectives of current students and recent graduates of Canadian genetic counselling programs regarding the quality of education on care for intersex individuals. Participants generally reported satisfaction in the medical aspects of intersex education provided within the curriculum. However, the education on VSCs was situated in the biomedical model of care, focused on the disordered aspects of an individual, and characterized by using DSD terminology. This focus on pathologization reflects the societal constructs of “othering”, discrimination, and prejudice that could be mediated by integrating social and psychosocial approaches to healthcare. This narrow approach to instruction can lead to missed opportunities for GC students to engage in personalized care, develop cultural competence, recognize opportunities to ameliorate health inequalities and advocate for patients’ human rights. However, according to our participants, discussions about psychosocial aspects, issues tied to social identities, and the impact of stigma occurred primarily in informal settings and were largely driven by student interests. “If I hadn’t had that one lecture by a second-year student who took the initiative to do it, I don’t think we would have received the education that we did” remarked one participant on their Intersex training. Though there can be arguments made that counseling skills can be transferred to multiple counseling situations excluding these topics from the curricula places a burden on CGs to learn the material on their own and deprives them of opportunities of working with groups for whom engagement with the medical establishment is for many already fraught. [ 46 ] This knowledge gap is reflected in the most recent Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling (ACGC) standards. Categories for required curriculum content related to psychosocial topics are defined (e.g., sensitivity and competency in the context of multiculturalism, disability awareness, etc.), but there are no specific requirements on the provision of training that addresses the needs of situationally marginalized groups such as individuals with VSC [ 37 ]. In response to this division in training, all participants expressed support for formal integration on intersex topics into the curriculum. The participants’ identification of existing knowledge gaps and their further interest on resources for intersex management is consistent with other studies where GCs have been assessed regarding training opportunities to provide more comprehensive care to other minority groups [ 32 , 36 ].

Participants noted the current inadequacy in training on psychosocial aspects of intersex issues and recommended adding lectures or workshops to rectify this knowledge gap. This would provide opportunities to incorporate existing teaching infrastructure into training, such as the eQuality virtual module, developed by the University of Louisville School of Medicine [ 47 ]. The module touches on issues faced by SOGI and intersex communities and continues to be updated via continuous input by the patient populations in question [ 47 ]. Additionally, participants attributed a high level of value to learning about the lived patient experience and gaining a better understanding of the quality of life for intersex individuals. As described in some of the challenges to counselling in the prenatal setting, the ability to provide a balanced perspective when counselling about intersex can be facilitated by exposure and encounters with intersex individuals and patient advocacy groups. Intersex community training would be invaluable in that one community embodies a range counselling contexts (prenatal, at birth, puberty, and adult) with the concomitant variation in terminology and communication associated the age and culture of the patient. Further, positive interactions with healthcare providers by this community helps to build trusting relationships necessary for quality care. Thus, training that is centered on the voices of the intersex community is necessary for GCs to encourage patients and prospective parents to develop a more nuanced understanding of the situation. This is also observed in literature commenting on the training needs of healthcare providers regarding intersex issues [ 27 ].

Lastly, participants noted that discussions about intersex topics during training are often lumped into discussions about SOGI minorities. Many respondents questioned this practice as it may treat these groups as a monolith population, lacking clarity or distinction between these possible dimensions of personal identity. While the intersex community is commonly included in the popular “LGBTQIA2S+” acronym and may share important social trajectories with SOGI minorities, [ 3 ] the needs of intersex individuals are still distinct from these groups [ 48 ]. Intersex people ultimately face unique challenges in medical settings which warrant individual concern. Concerns raised by participants are in line with recommendations described by Parent et al., outlining how some advocacy groups have called for awareness of these differences and highlighted the importance of treating the needs of marginalized groups with careful distinction [ 49 ].

Study limitations

There are several limitations to this study. First, it is a qualitative study drawing from a diversity of participants across Canada from eight separate cohorts. Due to the relatively small number of participants, perspectives detailed in this study may not be representative of all Canadian GC students. Second, enrollment into the study was voluntary, which may contribute to a positive response bias and the views may possibly reflect those with a vested interest in the topic and those with more available time to participate. In parallel, the interpretation of participants’ responses is also subject to the researchers’ viewpoints and understanding. However, the development of a codebook, and having multiple independent reviewers were employed to minimize researcher bias. Participant experiences reflect that of current students and recent graduates in the field. Separate research is needed for middle or late career GCs currently practicing, regarding their readiness and quality or educations on intersex, and possible supplementary continuing education opportunities. Finally, while the population of interest in this study is GCs and students, the topic of intersex education implicates the larger intersex community which has historically been underrepresented in medical settings and by extension, research as well. Therefore, it is essential that in addition to research data, any changes to the GC training curriculum be centered around intersex voices and perspectives. Such a perspective was sought in another study.

In summary, this study has identified gaps in the Canadian GCs’ training curriculum related to intersex issues and described best practices to foster social awareness in person-centred care for intersex individuals. Through interviews, genetic counselling students and recent graduates reflected on their experiences during training regarding care of intersex individuals. Thematic analysis revealed that gaps in training further perpetuates of the stigma and marginalization experienced by the intersex community. Participants reported adequate training on the medical aspects of intersex, but inadequate training on psychosocial aspects of intersex identity and social stigma (which were relegated to informal or student-initiated settings). In response to this apparent division in GC training, participants expressed support for a more formal integration of intersex topics into the curriculum. A major challenge raised by participants was uncertainty in approaching discussions of identification of VSC with patients or parents, particularly in a prenatal setting. Overall, these findings demonstrate the need for additional training so that GCs can provide nuanced and affirming psychosocial support in the care of intersex individuals. To achieve this, the educational gaps related to intersex topics must first be bridged. GC training programs have an opportunity to address these gaps in the broader context of promoting person-centred and inclusive care that is more accessible to the wide diversity of patients and families seen by GCs.

Data availability

Redacted transcripts of the interviews are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling

Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors

Congenital adrenal hyperplasia

Disorders of sex development

• Genetic counselling
• Genetic counsellors

Healthcare providers

Sexual orientation and/or gender identity

Variations in sex characteristics

OHCHR. Background Note Human Rights Violations Against Intersex People [Internet]. [cited 2023 Sep 17]. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Discrimination/LGBT/BackgroundNoteHumanRightsViolationsagainstIntersexPeople.pdf

OHCHR, Free. and Equal Campaign Fact Sheet - Intersex [Internet]. [cited 2023 Nov 17]. https://www.unfe.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/UNFE-Intersex.pdf

Viloria H, Nieto M, Law A. The spectrum of sex: the science of male, female, and intersex. London; Philadephia: Jessica Kingsley; 2020. p. 156.

Google Scholar  

InterACT HR, Watch (Organization), editors. I want to be like nature made me: medically unnecessary surgeries on intersex children in the US. Amsterdam: Human Rights Watch; 2017. p. 179.

Grinspan MC, GATE - Global Action for Trans Equality. 2019 [cited 2023 Aug 9]. The Road to Hell: Intersex People, Sexual Health & Human Rights - GATE. https://gate.ngo/the-road-to-hell-intersex-people-sexual-health-and-human-rights/

Frader J, Alderson P, Asch A, Aspinall C, Davis D, Dreger A, et al. Health Care professionals and Intersex conditions. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004;158(5):426.

Article   Google Scholar  

Hegarty P, Donnelly L, Dutton PF, Gillingham S, Vecchietti V, Williams K. Understanding of intersex: the meanings of umbrella terms and opinions about medical and social responses among laypeople in the United States and United Kingdom. Psychol Sex Orientat Gend Divers. 2021;8(1):25–37.

Lundberg T, Hegarty P, Roen K. Making sense of ‘Intersex’ and ‘DSD’: how laypeople understand and use terminology. Psychol Sexuality. 2018;9(2):161–73.

Crocetti D, Monro S, Vecchietti V, Yeadon-Lee T. Towards an agency-based model of intersex, variations of sex characteristics (VSC) and DSD/dsd health. Cult Health Sex. 2021;23(4):500–15.

Jaramillo C, Nyquist C, Riggan KA, Egginton J, Phelan S, Allyse M. Delivering the diagnosis of sex chromosome aneuploidy: experiences and preferences of parents and individuals. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2019;58(3):336–42.

Streuli JC, Vayena E, Cavicchia-Balmer Y, Huber J. Shaping parents: impact of contrasting Professional Counseling on Parents’ decision making for children with disorders of Sex Development. J Sex Med. 2013;10(8):1953–60.

Dickens BM. Management of intersex newborns: legal and ethical developments. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2018;143(2):255–9.

Donald C, Ehrenfeld JM. The opportunity for Medical Systems to reduce Health disparities among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex patients. J Med Syst. 2015;39(11):178.

Taskfo ALC, Harper A, Finnerty P, Martinez M, Brace A, Crethar HC, et al. Association for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender issues in Counseling competencies for Counseling with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, and Ally individuals: approved by the ALGBTIC Board on June 22, 2012. J LGBT Issues Couns. 2013;7(1):2–43.

Jones T. Intersex Studies: a Systematic Review of International Health Literature. SAGE Open. 2018;8(2):215824401774557.

Roen K. Intersex or diverse sex development: Critical Review of Psychosocial Health Care Research and indications for practice. J Sex Res. 2019;56(4–5):511–28.

Sandberg DE, Gardner M, Callens N, Mazur T. The DSD-TRN Psychosocial Workgroup, the DSD-TRN Advocacy Advisory Network, and Accord Alliance. Interdisciplinary care in disorders/differences of sex development (DSD): the psychosocial component of the DSD-Translational research network. Am J Med Genet. 2017;175(2):279–92.

Mouriquand PDE, Gorduza DB, Gay CL, Meyer-Bahlburg HFL, Baker L, Baskin LS, et al. Surgery in disorders of sex development (DSD) with a gender issue: if (why), when, and how? J Pediatr Urol. 2016;12(3):139–49.

Casey RK, Trotman G, Damle L, Menzel M, Gomez-Lobo V. Prenatal diagnosis and management of disorders of sexual differentiation. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2014;27(2):e57–8.

Lee PA, Nordenström A, Houk CP, Ahmed SF, Auchus R, Baratz A, et al. Global disorders of Sex Development Update since 2006: perceptions, Approach and Care. Horm Res Paediatr. 2016;85(3):158–80.

Gomez-Lobo V. Multidisciplinary care for individuals with disorders of sex development. Curr Opin Obst Gynecol. 2014;26(5):366–71.

Accord, Alliance, Intersex Society of North America. Clinical Guidelines for Management of DSDs in Childhood. Consortium on the Management of Disorders of Sex Development [Internet]. 2006. http://www.dsdguidelines.org

Resta R, Biesecker BB, Bennett RL, Blum S, Estabrooks Hahn S, Strecker MN, et al. A new definition of genetic counseling: National Society of Genetic Counselors’ Task Force Report. J Genet Couns. 2006;15(2):77–83.

Yoshii K, Naiki Y, Terada Y, Fukami M, Horikawa R. Mismatch between fetal sexing and birth phenotype: a case of complete androgen insensitivity syndrome. Endocr J. 2018;65(2):221–5.

Stevens C, Llorin H, Gabriel C, Mandigo C, Gochyyev P, Studwell C. Genetic counseling for fetal sex prediction by NIPT: challenges and opportunities. J Genet Couns. 2023;32(5):945–56.

Kamoun C, Rossi W, Kilberg MJ. Ethical concerns surrounding sex prediction using noninvasive prenatal screening from pediatric endocrinologists’ perspective. J Genet Couns. 2023;32(5):937–41.

Saulnier KM, Gallois H, Joly Y. Prenatal genetic testing for Intersex Conditions in Canada. J Obstet Gynecol Can. 2021;43(3):369–71.

Marteau M, Nippert T, Hall I, Limbert S, Reid C, Bobrow M. Outcomes of pregnancies diagnosed with Klinefelter syndrome: the possible influence of health professionals†. Prenat Diagn. 2002;22(7):562–6.

Glessner HD, VandenLangenberg E, Veach PM, LeRoy BS. Are genetic counselors and GLBT patients on the same page? An investigation of attitudes, practices, and genetic counseling experiences. J Genet Couns. 2012;21(2):326–36.

Berro T, Zayhowski K, Field T, Channaoui N, Sotelo J. Genetic counselors’ comfort and knowledge of cancer risk assessment for transgender patients. Jrnl Gene Coun. 2020;29(3):342–51.

Barnes H, Morris E, Austin J. Trans-inclusive genetic counseling services: recommendations from members of the transgender and non‐binary community. Jrnl Gene Coun. 2020;29(3):423–34.

Zayhowski K, Park J, Boehmer U, Gabriel C, Berro T, Campion M. Cancer genetic counselors’ experiences with transgender patients: a qualitative study. J Genet Couns. 2019;jgc4.1092.

Sheehan E, Bennett RL, Harris M, Chan-Smutko G. Assessing transgender and gender non‐conforming pedigree nomenclature in current genetic counselors’ practice: the case for geometric inclusivity. Jrnl Gene Coun. 2020;29(6):1114–25.

Rosenwohl-Mack A, Tamar-Mattis S, Baratz AB, Dalke KB, Ittelson A, Zieselman K, et al. A national study on the physical and mental health of intersex adults in the U.S. Useche SA, editor. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(10):e0240088.

Carpenter M. Intersex human rights, sexual orientation, gender identity, sex characteristics and the Yogyakarta principles plus 10. Culture. Health Sexuality. 2021;23(4):516–32.

Tuite A, Dalla Piazza M, Brandi K, Pletcher BA. Beyond circles and squares: a commentary on updating pedigree nomenclature to better represent patient diversity. Jrnl Gene Coun. 2020;29(3):435–9.

ACGC - Accrediation Council for Genetic Counseling. Practice Based Competencies: ACGC [Internet]. 2019. https://www.gceducation.org/practice-based-competencies/

Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Fifth edition. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2018. 275 p.

MacFarlane IM, McCarthy Veach P, LeRoy BS. Chapter 8: conducting qualitative genetic Counseling Research. Genetic Counselling Research: a practical guide. Oxford University Press; 2014.

Reaume G. Understanding critical disability studies. CMAJ. 2014;186(16):1248–9.

Cohen D, Crabtree B. Qualitative Research Guidelines Project [Internet]. 2006. http://www.qualres.org/HomeSemi-3629.html

Leon AC, Davis LL, Kraemer HC. The role and interpretation of pilot studies in clinical research. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(5):626–9.

Clarke V, Brown V. Thematic analysis. Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research. Dordecht, The Netherlands: Springer; 2014. pp. 6626–8.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness Criteria. Int J Qualitative Methods. 2017;16(1):160940691773384.

MacFarlane IM, McCarthy Veach P, LeRoy BS. Genetic Counseling Research: A Practical Guide [Internet]. Oxford University Press; 2014 [cited 2023 Aug 9]. http://www.oxfordmedicine.com/view/ https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199359097.001.0001/med-9780199359097

Wang JC, Dalke KB, Nachnani R, Baratz AB, Flatt JD. Medical Mistrust mediates the relationship between nonconsensual intersex surgery and Healthcare Avoidance among Intersex adults. Ann Behav Med. 2023;57(12):1024–31.

Holthouser A, Sawning S, Leslie KF, Faye Jones V, Steinbock S, Noonan EJ, eQuality: a process model to develop an integrated, comprehensive medical education curriculum for LGBT, gender nonconforming, and, health DSD et al. MedSciEduc. 2017;27(2):371–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-017-0393-5 .

International Lesbian. Gay, Bisexual, trans and Intersex Association. Minorities Report 2017: attitudes to sexual and gender minorities around the world [Internet]. Geneva: ILGA; 2017 Oct [cited 2023 Aug 9]. https://ilga.org/downloads/ILGA_RIWI_Minorities_Report_2017_Attitudes_to_sexual_and_gender_minorities.pdf

Parent MC, DeBlaere C, Moradi B. Approaches to Research on Intersectionality: perspectives on gender, LGBT, and Racial/Ethnic identities. Sex Roles. 2013;68(11–12):639–45.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Marilou Charron for her assistance in recoding the original data and Terese Knoppers for their invaluable advice.

Funding for this project was provided by McGill University’s Genetic Counselling program and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) grant 435-2018-0626 (Toward effective health communication with intersex Canadians: A study of ethical and legal challenges).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Medical Genetics, McGill University Health Centre, 1001 Decarie Blvd, Montreal, QC, H4A 3J1, Canada

Adrienne B. Atayan

Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, 740 avenue Dr. Penfield, suite 5200, Montreal, QC, H3A 0G1, Canada

Katherine Huerne, Nicole Palmour & Yann Joly

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: YJ, AA; Data curation: AA; Formal analysis: AA, NP, MC; Funding acquisition: YJ; Investigation: AA; Methodology: AA; Project administration: YJ, NP; Resources: AA, KH; Software: AA, NP, KH; Supervision: YJ, NP; Validation: AA, KH, MC, NP; Visualization: AA, KH; Writing-original draft: AA, KH; Writing-review & editing: KH, NP, AA.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole Palmour .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethics approval for the study was obtained from McGill University’s Research Ethics Board in Winter 2020 (REF #20-11-054). Informed consent was obtained from all participants as required by the REB. Data was de-identified and the author received and archived written consent for all data used.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Atayan, A.B., Huerne, K., Palmour, N. et al. Towards equity & inclusion: a critical examination of genetic Counselling Education on Intersex Healthcare. BMC Med Educ 24 , 942 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05898-x

Download citation

Received : 26 September 2023

Accepted : 12 August 2024

Published : 29 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05898-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Education and training
• Variations of sex characteristics

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Green Chemistry

Carbon negative biochar systems contribute to sustainable urban green infrastructure: a critical review.

Biochar from biomass and waste is a valuable component of various urban green infrastructures, including green roofs, permeable pavements, green walls, and green parking lots. Incorporating biochar into substrate mixtures offers numerous benefits, including improved water retention, nutrient availability, plant growth, and carbon sequestration. Moreover, biochar plays a crucial role in stormwater management by effectively retaining and filtering stormwater, reducing runoff, mitigating urban flooding, and improving surface water quality. This study conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis and synthesis of the literature to provide a broad perspective of the current understanding of biochar use in green infrastructure projects, focusing on the impact of biochar on soil and environmental quality, water retention, pollutant removal and the overall performance and sustainability of green infrastructure systems. This review also provides a comprehensive synthesis of the potential of biochar in enhancing green infrastructure systems and guiding future research and implementation strategies. The insights provided in this review can guide corporate stakeholders in understanding the benefits, challenges, and applications of biochar in urban green infrastructure management, empowering them to make informed decisions and contribute to the development of sustainable and resilient urban environments aligned with the principles of the UN SDGs and ESG considerations.

• This article is part of the themed collections: Exploring the Frontiers: Unveiling New Horizons in Carbon Efficient Biomass Utilization and 2024 Green Chemistry Reviews

Supplementary files

• Supplementary information ZIP (3427K)
• Supplementary information PDF (1474K)

Article information

Download citation, permissions.

S. S. Senadheera, P. A. Withana, J. Y. Lim, S. You, S. X. Chang, F. Wang, J. H. Rhee and Y. S. Ok, Green Chem. , 2024, Accepted Manuscript , DOI: 10.1039/D4GC03071K

To request permission to reproduce material from this article, please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page .

If you are an author contributing to an RSC publication, you do not need to request permission provided correct acknowledgement is given.

If you are the author of this article, you do not need to request permission to reproduce figures and diagrams provided correct acknowledgement is given. If you want to reproduce the whole article in a third-party publication (excluding your thesis/dissertation for which permission is not required) please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page .

Read more about how to correctly acknowledge RSC content .

Social activity

Search articles by author.

This article has not yet been cited.

Advertisements