format of a journal article review

Get Started

Take the first step and invest in your future.

Online Programs

Offering flexibility & convenience in 51 online degrees & programs.

Prairie Stars

Featuring 15 intercollegiate NCAA Div II athletic teams.

Find your Fit

UIS has over 85 student and 10 greek life organizations, and many volunteer opportunities.

Arts & Culture

Celebrating the arts to create rich cultural experiences on campus.

Give Like a Star

Your generosity helps fuel fundraising for scholarships, programs and new initiatives.

Bragging Rights

UIS was listed No. 1 in Illinois and No. 3 in the Midwest in 2023 rankings.

• Quick links Applicants & Students Important Apps & Links Alumni Faculty and Staff Community Admissions How to Apply Cost & Aid Tuition Calculator Registrar Orientation Visit Campus Academics Register for Class Programs of Study Online Degrees & Programs Graduate Education International Student Services Study Away Student Support Bookstore UIS Life Dining Diversity & Inclusion Get Involved Health & Wellness COVID-19 United in Safety Residence Life Student Life Programs UIS Connection Important Apps UIS Mobile App Advise U Canvas myUIS i-card Balance Pay My Bill - UIS Bursar Self-Service Email Resources Bookstore Box Information Technology Services Library Orbit Policies Webtools Get Connected Area Information Calendar Campus Recreation Departments & Programs (A-Z) Parking UIS Newsroom Connect & Get Involved Update your Info Alumni Events Alumni Networks & Groups Volunteer Opportunities Alumni Board News & Publications Featured Alumni Alumni News UIS Alumni Magazine Resources Order your Transcripts Give Back Alumni Programs Career Development Services & Support Accessibility Services Campus Services Campus Police Facilities & Services Registrar Faculty & Staff Resources Website Project Request Web Services Training & Tools Academic Impressions Career Connect CSA Reporting Cybersecurity Training Faculty Research FERPA Training Website Login Campus Resources Newsroom Campus Calendar Campus Maps i-Card Human Resources Public Relations Webtools Arts & Events UIS Performing Arts Center Visual Arts Gallery Event Calendar Sangamon Experience Center for Lincoln Studies ECCE Speaker Series Community Engagement Center for State Policy and Leadership Illinois Innocence Project Innovate Springfield Central IL Nonprofit Resource Center NPR Illinois Community Resources Child Protection Training Academy Office of Electronic Media University Archives/IRAD Institute for Illinois Public Finance

Request Info

How to Review a Journal Article

• Request Info Request info for....     Undergraduate/Graduate     Online     Study Away     Continuing & Professional Education     International Student Services     General Inquiries

For many kinds of assignments, like a  literature review , you may be asked to offer a critique or review of a journal article. This is an opportunity for you as a scholar to offer your  qualified opinion  and  evaluation  of how another scholar has composed their article, argument, and research. That means you will be expected to go beyond a simple  summary  of the article and evaluate it on a deeper level. As a college student, this might sound intimidating. However, as you engage with the research process, you are becoming immersed in a particular topic, and your insights about the way that topic is presented are valuable and can contribute to the overall conversation surrounding your topic.

IMPORTANT NOTE!!

Some disciplines, like Criminal Justice, may only want you to summarize the article without including your opinion or evaluation. If your assignment is to summarize the article only, please see our literature review handout.

Before getting started on the critique, it is important to review the article thoroughly and critically. To do this, we recommend take notes,  annotating , and reading the article several times before critiquing. As you read, be sure to note important items like the thesis, purpose, research questions, hypotheses, methods, evidence, key findings, major conclusions, tone, and publication information. Depending on your writing context, some of these items may not be applicable.

Questions to Consider

To evaluate a source, consider some of the following questions. They are broken down into different categories, but answering these questions will help you consider what areas to examine. With each category, we recommend identifying the strengths and weaknesses in each since that is a critical part of evaluation.

Evaluating Purpose and Argument

• How well is the purpose made clear in the introduction through background/context and thesis?
• How well does the abstract represent and summarize the article’s major points and argument?
• How well does the objective of the experiment or of the observation fill a need for the field?
• How well is the argument/purpose articulated and discussed throughout the body of the text?
• How well does the discussion maintain cohesion?

Evaluating the Presentation/Organization of Information

• How appropriate and clear is the title of the article?
• Where could the author have benefited from expanding, condensing, or omitting ideas?
• How clear are the author’s statements? Challenge ambiguous statements.
• What underlying assumptions does the author have, and how does this affect the credibility or clarity of their article?
• How objective is the author in his or her discussion of the topic?
• How well does the organization fit the article’s purpose and articulate key goals?

Evaluating Methods

• How appropriate are the study design and methods for the purposes of the study?
• How detailed are the methods being described? Is the author leaving out important steps or considerations?
• Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable the reader to duplicate them?

Evaluating Data

• Scan and spot-check calculations. Are the statistical methods appropriate?
• Do you find any content repeated or duplicated?
• How many errors of fact and interpretation does the author include? (You can check on this by looking up the references the author cites).
• What pertinent literature has the author cited, and have they used this literature appropriately?

Following, we have an example of a summary and an evaluation of a research article. Note that in most literature review contexts, the summary and evaluation would be much shorter. This extended example shows the different ways a student can critique and write about an article.

Chik, A. (2012). Digital gameplay for autonomous foreign language learning: Gamers’ and language teachers’ perspectives. In H. Reinders (ed.),  Digital games in language learning and teaching  (pp. 95-114). Eastbourne, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Be sure to include the full citation either in a reference page or near your evaluation if writing an  annotated bibliography .

In Chik’s article “Digital Gameplay for Autonomous Foreign Language Learning: Gamers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives”, she explores the ways in which “digital gamers manage gaming and gaming-related activities to assume autonomy in their foreign language learning,” (96) which is presented in contrast to how teachers view the “pedagogical potential” of gaming. The research was described as an “umbrella project” consisting of two parts. The first part examined 34 language teachers’ perspectives who had limited experience with gaming (only five stated they played games regularly) (99). Their data was recorded through a survey, class discussion, and a seven-day gaming trial done by six teachers who recorded their reflections through personal blog posts. The second part explored undergraduate gaming habits of ten Hong Kong students who were regular gamers. Their habits were recorded through language learning histories, videotaped gaming sessions, blog entries of gaming practices, group discussion sessions, stimulated recall sessions on gaming videos, interviews with other gamers, and posts from online discussion forums. The research shows that while students recognize the educational potential of games and have seen benefits of it in their lives, the instructors overall do not see the positive impacts of gaming on foreign language learning.

The summary includes the article’s purpose, methods, results, discussion, and citations when necessary.

This article did a good job representing the undergraduate gamers’ voices through extended quotes and stories. Particularly for the data collection of the undergraduate gamers, there were many opportunities for an in-depth examination of their gaming practices and histories. However, the representation of the teachers in this study was very uneven when compared to the students. Not only were teachers labeled as numbers while the students picked out their own pseudonyms, but also when viewing the data collection, the undergraduate students were more closely examined in comparison to the teachers in the study. While the students have fifteen extended quotes describing their experiences in their research section, the teachers only have two of these instances in their section, which shows just how imbalanced the study is when presenting instructor voices.

Some research methods, like the recorded gaming sessions, were only used with students whereas teachers were only asked to blog about their gaming experiences. This creates a richer narrative for the students while also failing to give instructors the chance to have more nuanced perspectives. This lack of nuance also stems from the emphasis of the non-gamer teachers over the gamer teachers. The non-gamer teachers’ perspectives provide a stark contrast to the undergraduate gamer experiences and fits neatly with the narrative of teachers not valuing gaming as an educational tool. However, the study mentioned five teachers that were regular gamers whose perspectives are left to a short section at the end of the presentation of the teachers’ results. This was an opportunity to give the teacher group a more complex story, and the opportunity was entirely missed.

Additionally, the context of this study was not entirely clear. The instructors were recruited through a master’s level course, but the content of the course and the institution’s background is not discussed. Understanding this context helps us understand the course’s purpose(s) and how those purposes may have influenced the ways in which these teachers interpreted and saw games. It was also unclear how Chik was connected to this masters’ class and to the students. Why these particular teachers and students were recruited was not explicitly defined and also has the potential to skew results in a particular direction.

Overall, I was inclined to agree with the idea that students can benefit from language acquisition through gaming while instructors may not see the instructional value, but I believe the way the research was conducted and portrayed in this article made it very difficult to support Chik’s specific findings.

Some professors like you to begin an evaluation with something positive but isn’t always necessary.

The evaluation is clearly organized and uses transitional phrases when moving to a new topic.

This evaluation includes a summative statement that gives the overall impression of the article at the end, but this can also be placed at the beginning of the evaluation.

This evaluation mainly discusses the representation of data and methods. However, other areas, like organization, are open to critique.

How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples

An article review is an academic assignment that invites you to study a piece of academic research closely. Then, you should present its summary and critically evaluate it using the knowledge you’ve gained in class and during your independent study. If you get such a task at college or university, you shouldn’t confuse it with a response paper, which is a distinct assignment with other purposes (we’ll talk about it in detail below).

Our specialists will write a custom essay specially for you!

In this article, prepared by Custom-Writing experts, you’ll find: 

• the intricacies of article review writing;
• the difference between an article review and similar assignments;
• a step-by-step algorithm for review composition;
• a couple of samples to guide you throughout the writing process.

So, if you wish to study our article review example and discover helpful writing tips, keep reading.

❓ What Is an Article Review?

• ✍️ Writing Steps

📑 Article Review Format

🔗 references.

An article review is an academic paper that summarizes and critically evaluates the information presented in your selected article. 

The first thing you should note when approaching the task of an article review is that not every article is suitable for this assignment. Let’s have a look at the variety of articles to understand what you can choose from.

Popular Vs. Scholarly Articles

In most cases, you’ll be required to review a scholarly, peer-reviewed article – one composed in compliance with rigorous academic standards. Yet, the Web is also full of popular articles that don’t present original scientific value and shouldn’t be selected for a review.  

Just in 1 hour! We will write you a plagiarism-free paper in hardly more than 1 hour

Not sure how to distinguish these two types? Here is a comparative table to help you out.

Article Review vs. Response Paper

Now, let’s consider the difference between an article review and a response paper:

• If you’re assigned to critique a scholarly article , you will need to compose an article review .  
• If your subject of analysis is a popular article , you can respond to it with a well-crafted response paper .  

The reason for such distinctions is the quality and structure of these two article types. Peer-reviewed, scholarly articles have clear-cut quality criteria, allowing you to conduct and present a structured assessment of the assigned material. Popular magazines have loose or non-existent quality criteria and don’t offer an opportunity for structured evaluation. So, they are only fit for a subjective response, in which you can summarize your reactions and emotions related to the reading material.  

All in all, you can structure your response assignments as outlined in the tips below.

✍️ How to Write an Article Review: Step by Step

Here is a tried and tested algorithm for article review writing from our experts. We’ll consider only the critical review variety of this academic assignment. So, let’s get down to the stages you need to cover to get a stellar review.  

Receive a plagiarism-free paper tailored to your instructions. Cut 20% off your first order!

Read the Article

As with any reviews, reports, and critiques, you must first familiarize yourself with the assigned material. It’s impossible to review something you haven’t read, so set some time for close, careful reading of the article to identify:

• Its topic.  
• Its type.  
• The author’s main points and message. 
• The arguments they use to prove their points. 
• The methodology they use to approach the subject. 

In terms of research type , your article will usually belong to one of three types explained below. 

Summarize the Article

Now that you’ve read the text and have a general impression of the content, it’s time to summarize it for your readers. Look into the article’s text closely to determine:

• The thesis statement , or general message of the author.  
• Research question, purpose, and context of research.  
• Supporting points for the author’s assumptions and claims.  
• Major findings and supporting evidence.  

As you study the article thoroughly, make notes on the margins or write these elements out on a sheet of paper. You can also apply a different technique: read the text section by section and formulate its gist in one phrase or sentence. Once you’re done, you’ll have a summary skeleton in front of you.

Evaluate the Article

The next step of review is content evaluation. Keep in mind that various research types will require a different set of review questions. Here is a complete list of evaluation points you can include.

Get an originally-written paper according to your instructions!

Write the Text

After completing the critical review stage, it’s time to compose your article review.

The format of this assignment is standard – you will have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. The introduction should present your article and summarize its content. The body will contain a structured review according to all four dimensions covered in the previous section. The concluding part will typically recap all the main points you’ve identified during your assessment.  

It is essential to note that an article review is, first of all, an academic assignment. Therefore, it should follow all rules and conventions of academic composition, such as:

• No contractions . Don’t use short forms, such as “don’t,” “can’t,” “I’ll,” etc. in academic writing. You need to spell out all those words.  
• Formal language and style . Avoid conversational phrasing and words that you would naturally use in blog posts or informal communication. For example, don’t use words like “pretty,” “kind of,” and “like.”  
• Third-person narrative . Academic reviews should be written from the third-person point of view, avoiding statements like “I think,” “in my opinion,” and so on.  
• No conversational forms . You shouldn’t turn to your readers directly in the text by addressing them with the pronoun “you.” It’s vital to keep the narrative neutral and impersonal.  
• Proper abbreviation use . Consult the list of correct abbreviations , like “e.g.” or “i.e.,” for use in your academic writing. If you use informal abbreviations like “FYA” or “f.i.,” your professor will reduce the grade.  
• Complete sentences . Make sure your sentences contain the subject and the predicate; avoid shortened or sketch-form phrases suitable for a draft only.  
• No conjunctions at the beginning of a sentence . Remember the FANBOYS rule – don’t start a sentence with words like “and” or “but.” They often seem the right way to build a coherent narrative, but academic writing rules disfavor such usage.  
• No abbreviations or figures at the beginning of a sentence . Never start a sentence with a number — spell it out if you need to use it anyway. Besides, sentences should never begin with abbreviations like “e.g.”  

Finally, a vital rule for an article review is properly formatting the citations. We’ll discuss the correct use of citation styles in the following section.

When composing an article review, keep these points in mind:

• Start with a full reference to the reviewed article so the reader can locate it quickly.  
• Ensure correct formatting of in-text references.  
• Provide a complete list of used external sources on the last page of the review – your bibliographical entries .  

You’ll need to understand the rules of your chosen citation style to meet all these requirements. Below, we’ll discuss the two most common referencing styles – APA and MLA.

Article Review in APA

When you need to compose an article review in the APA format , here is the general bibliographical entry format you should use for journal articles on your reference page:  

• Author’s last name, First initial. Middle initial. (Year of Publication). Name of the article. Name of the Journal, volume (number), pp. #-#. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy

Horigian, V. E., Schmidt, R. D., & Feaster, D. J. (2021). Loneliness, mental health, and substance use among US young adults during COVID-19. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 53 (1), pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2020.1836435

Your in-text citations should follow the author-date format like this:

• If you paraphrase the source and mention the author in the text: According to Horigian et al. (2021), young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic. 
• If you paraphrase the source and don’t mention the author in the text: Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al., 2021). 
• If you quote the source: As Horigian et al. (2021) point out, there were “elevated levels of loneliness, depression, anxiety, alcohol use, and drug use among young adults during COVID-19” (p. 6). 

Note that your in-text citations should include “et al.,” as in the examples above, if your article has 3 or more authors. If you have one or two authors, your in-text citations would look like this:

• One author: “According to Smith (2020), depression is…” or “Depression is … (Smith, 2020).”
• Two authors: “According to Smith and Brown (2020), anxiety means…” or “Anxiety means (Smith & Brown, 2020).”

Finally, in case you have to review a book or a website article, here are the general formats for citing these source types on your APA reference list.

Article Review in MLA

If your assignment requires MLA-format referencing, here’s the general format you should use for citing journal articles on your Works Cited page: 

• Author’s last name, First name. “Title of an Article.” Title of the Journal , vol. #, no. #, year, pp. #-#. 

Horigian, Viviana E., et al. “Loneliness, Mental Health, and Substance Use Among US Young Adults During COVID-19.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs , vol. 53, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1-9.

In-text citations in the MLA format follow the author-page citation format and look like this:

• According to Horigian et al., young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (6).
• Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al. 6).

Like in APA, the abbreviation “et al.” is only needed in MLA if your article has 3 or more authors.

If you need to cite a book or a website page, here are the general MLA formats for these types of sources.

✅ Article Review Template

Here is a handy, universal article review template to help you move on with any review assignment. We’ve tried to make it as generic as possible to guide you in the academic process.

📝 Article Review Examples

The theory is good, but practice is even better. Thus, we’ve created three brief examples to show you how to write an article review. You can study the full-text samples by following the links.

📃 Men, Women, & Money   

This article review examines a famous piece, “Men, Women & Money – How the Sexes Differ with Their Finances,” published by Amy Livingston in 2020. The author of this article claims that men generally spend more money than women. She makes this conclusion from a close analysis of gender-specific expenditures across five main categories: food, clothing, cars, entertainment, and general spending patterns. Livingston also looks at men’s approach to saving to argue that counter to the common perception of women’s light-hearted attitude to money, men are those who spend more on average.  

📃 When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism   

This is a review of Jonathan Heidt’s 2016 article titled “When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism,” written as an advocacy of right-wing populism rising in many Western states. The author illustrates the case with the election of Donald Trump as the US President and the rise of right-wing rhetoric in many Western countries. These examples show how nationalist sentiment represents a reaction to global immigration and a failure of globalization.  

📃 Sleep Deprivation   

This is a review of the American Heart Association’s article titled “The Dangers of Sleep Deprivation.” It discusses how the national organization concerned with the American population’s cardiovascular health links the lack of high-quality sleep to far-reaching health consequences. The organization’s experts reveal how a consistent lack of sleep leads to Alzheimer’s disease development, obesity, type 2 diabetes, etc.  

✏️ Article Review FAQ

A high-quality article review should summarize the assigned article’s content and offer data-backed reactions and evaluations of its quality in terms of the article’s purpose, methodology, and data used to argue the main points. It should be detailed, comprehensive, objective, and evidence-based.

The purpose of writing a review is to allow students to reflect on research quality and showcase their critical thinking and evaluation skills. Students should exhibit their mastery of close reading of research publications and their unbiased assessment.

The content of your article review will be the same in any format, with the only difference in the assignment’s formatting before submission. Ensure you have a separate title page made according to APA standards and cite sources using the parenthetical author-date referencing format.

You need to take a closer look at various dimensions of an assigned article to compose a valuable review. Study the author’s object of analysis, the purpose of their research, the chosen method, data, and findings. Evaluate all these dimensions critically to see whether the author has achieved the initial goals. Finally, offer improvement recommendations to add a critique aspect to your paper.

• Scientific Article Review: Duke University  
• Book and Article Reviews: William & Mary, Writing Resources Center  
• Sample Format for Reviewing a Journal Article: Boonshoft School of Medicine  
• Research Paper Review – Structure and Format Guidelines: New Jersey Institute of Technology  
• Article Review: University of Waterloo  
• Article Review: University of South Australia  
• How to Write a Journal Article Review: University of Newcastle Library Guides  
• Writing Help: The Article Review: Central Michigan University Libraries  
• Write a Critical Review of a Scientific Journal Article: McLaughlin Library  
• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to LinkedIn
• Share to email

Short essays answer a specific question on the subject. They usually are anywhere between 250 words and 750 words long. A paper with less than 250 words isn’t considered a finished text, so it doesn’t fall under the category of a short essay. Essays of such format are required for...

High school and college students often face challenges when crafting a compare-and-contrast essay. A well-written paper of this kind needs to be structured appropriately to earn you good grades. Knowing how to organize your ideas allows you to present your ideas in a coherent and logical manner This article by...

If you’re a student, you’ve heard about a formal essay: a factual, research-based paper written in 3rd person. Most students have to produce dozens of them during their educational career.  Writing a formal essay may not be the easiest task. But fear not: our custom-writing team is here to guide...

Narrative essays are unlike anything you wrote throughout your academic career. Instead of writing a formal paper, you need to tell a story. Familiar elements such as evidence and arguments are replaced with exposition and character development. The importance of writing an outline for an essay like this is hard...

A précis is a brief synopsis of a written piece. It is used to summarize and analyze a text’s main points. If you need to write a précis for a research paper or the AP Lang exam, you’ve come to the right place. In this comprehensive guide by Custom-Writing.org, you’ll...

A synthesis essay requires you to work with multiple sources. You combine the information gathered from them to present a well-rounded argument on a topic. Are you looking for the ultimate guide on synthesis essay writing? You’ve come to the right place! In this guide by our custom writing team,...

Do you know how to make your essay stand out? One of the easiest ways is to start your introduction with a catchy hook. A hook is a phrase or a sentence that helps to grab the reader’s attention. After reading this article by Custom-Writing.org, you will be able to...

Critical thinking is the process of evaluating and analyzing information. People who use it in everyday life are open to different opinions. They rely on reason and logic when making conclusions about certain issues. A critical thinking essay shows how your thoughts change as you research your topic. This type...

Process analysis is an explanation of how something works or happens. Want to know more? Read the following article prepared by our custom writing specialists and learn about: process analysis and its typesa process analysis outline tipsfree examples and other tips that might be helpful for your college assignment So,...

A visual analysis essay is an academic paper type that history and art students often deal with. It consists of a detailed description of an image or object. It can also include an interpretation or an argument that is supported by visual evidence. In this article, our custom writing experts...

Want to know how to write a reflection paper for college or school? To do that, you need to connect your personal experiences with theoretical knowledge. Usually, students are asked to reflect on a documentary, a text, or their experience. Sometimes one needs to write a paper about a lesson...

A character analysis is an examination of the personalities and actions of protagonists and antagonists that make up a story. It discusses their role in the story, evaluates their traits, and looks at their conflicts and experiences. You might need to write this assignment in school or college. Like any...

Journal Article Review in APA Style

Journal article reviews refer to the appraisal of potencies and limitations of an article’s opinion and subject matter. The article reviews offer the readers with an explanation, investigation and clarification to evaluate the importance of the article. A journal article review usually follows the APA style, which is in itself an exceptional mode of writing. Writing a journal article review in APA style requires a thorough reading of an article and then present our personal opinions on its subject matter.

In order to write a journal article review in APA style, one must necessarily conform to the detailed guidelines of APA style of writing. As such, a few tips for writing a journal article review in APA style have been provided in details below.

Tips for Writing Journal Article Review in APA Style

Getting started.

Read the complete article. Most journal articles use highly complicated and difficult language and wording. Thus, it is suggested to read the article thoroughly several times to understand it perfectly. Select a statement that effectively conveys the main idea of your review. Present the ideas in a rational order, keeping in mind that all opinions must sustain the main idea.

Start with a header with citation

Journal article reviews start with a header, including citation of the sources being reviewed. This citation is mentioned at the top of the review, following the APA style (refer to the APA style manual for more information). We will need the author’s name for the article, title of the article, journal of the published article, volume and issue number, publication date, and page numbers for the article.

Write a summary

The introductory paragraph of the review should provide a brief summary of the article, strictly limiting it to one to three paragraphs depending on the article length. The summary should discuss only the most imperative details about the article, like the author’s intention in writing the article, how the study was conducted, how the article relates to other work on the same subject, the results and other relevant information from the article.

Body of the review

The succeeding paragraphs of the review should present your ideas and opinions on the article. Discuss the significance and suggestion of the results of the study. The body of the article review should be limited to one to two paragraphs, including your understanding of the article, quotations from the article demonstrating your main ideas, discussing the article’s limitations and how to overcome them.

Concluding the review

The concluding paragraphs of the review should provide your personal appraisal of the journal article. Discuss whether the article is well-written or not, whether any information is missing, or if further research is necessary on the subject. Also, write a paragraph on how the author could develop the study results, what the information means on a large scale, how further investigation can develop the subject matter, and how the knowledge of this field can be extended further.

Citation and Revision

In-text citation of direct quotes or paraphrases from the article can be done using the author’s name, year of publication and page numbers (refer to the APA-style manual for citation guidelines). After finishing the writing of journal article review in APA style, it would be advised to re-visit the review after a few days and then re-read it altogether. By doing this, you will be able to view the review with a new perspective and may detect mistakes that were previously left undetected.

The above mentioned tips will help and guide you for writing a journal article review in APA style. However, while writing a journal article review, remember that you are undertaking more than just a narrative review. Thus, the article review should not merely focus on discussing what the article is about, but should reveal your personal ideas and opinions on the article.

Related Posts

Common apa style mistakes.

Writing or formatting research papers in APA style is a very delicate work. This requires a lot of learning and practice, without which slight errors can pose great blunders. In order to avoid committing common APA style mistakes in your research paper, we are going to provide some useful instruction on how to avoid these common […]

Most Common Reasons for Journal Editors Rejecting Paper

Rejection is unpleasant for everyone since it is demotivating. Even top scientists have encountered rejection in their carrier. Academic publishing, on the other hand, is rife with rejection. Any script could be rejected for multiple causes, which could be grouped into two categories: technical and editorial. Technical reasons  Fragmented information, like narrow sample size or […]

Roles & Responsibilities of Peer-Reviewers

Peer-Review Process Peer Review is an influential process of academic journal publication. All Manuscripts are Peer Reviewed by the subject experts. Before a scholarly work is published or approved, it is reviewed by a group of experts in the same field to ensure that it meets the appropriate criteria. Stages of Peer-Review Did you know […]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Editorial Manager, our manuscript submissions site will be unavailable between 12pm April 5, 2024 and 12pm April 8 2024 (Pacific Standard Time). We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections

How to Write a Peer Review

When you write a peer review for a manuscript, what should you include in your comments? What should you leave out? And how should the review be formatted?

This guide provides quick tips for writing and organizing your reviewer report.

Review Outline

Use an outline for your reviewer report so it’s easy for the editors and author to follow. This will also help you keep your comments organized.

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

Here’s how your outline might look:

1. Summary of the research and your overall impression

In your own words, summarize what the manuscript claims to report. This shows the editor how you interpreted the manuscript and will highlight any major differences in perspective between you and the other reviewers. Give an overview of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses. Think about this as your “take-home” message for the editors. End this section with your recommended course of action.

2. Discussion of specific areas for improvement

It’s helpful to divide this section into two parts: one for major issues and one for minor issues. Within each section, you can talk about the biggest issues first or go systematically figure-by-figure or claim-by-claim. Number each item so that your points are easy to follow (this will also make it easier for the authors to respond to each point). Refer to specific lines, pages, sections, or figure and table numbers so the authors (and editors) know exactly what you’re talking about.

Major vs. minor issues

What’s the difference between a major and minor issue? Major issues should consist of the essential points the authors need to address before the manuscript can proceed. Make sure you focus on what is  fundamental for the current study . In other words, it’s not helpful to recommend additional work that would be considered the “next step” in the study. Minor issues are still important but typically will not affect the overall conclusions of the manuscript. Here are some examples of what would might go in the “minor” category:

• Missing references (but depending on what is missing, this could also be a major issue)
• Technical clarifications (e.g., the authors should clarify how a reagent works)
• Data presentation (e.g., the authors should present p-values differently)
• Typos, spelling, grammar, and phrasing issues

3. Any other points

Confidential comments for the editors.

Some journals have a space for reviewers to enter confidential comments about the manuscript. Use this space to mention concerns about the submission that you’d want the editors to consider before sharing your feedback with the authors, such as concerns about ethical guidelines or language quality. Any serious issues should be raised directly and immediately with the journal as well.

This section is also where you will disclose any potentially competing interests, and mention whether you’re willing to look at a revised version of the manuscript.

Do not use this space to critique the manuscript, since comments entered here will not be passed along to the authors.  If you’re not sure what should go in the confidential comments, read the reviewer instructions or check with the journal first before submitting your review. If you are reviewing for a journal that does not offer a space for confidential comments, consider writing to the editorial office directly with your concerns.

Get this outline in a template

Giving Feedback

Giving feedback is hard. Giving effective feedback can be even more challenging. Remember that your ultimate goal is to discuss what the authors would need to do in order to qualify for publication. The point is not to nitpick every piece of the manuscript. Your focus should be on providing constructive and critical feedback that the authors can use to improve their study.

If you’ve ever had your own work reviewed, you already know that it’s not always easy to receive feedback. Follow the golden rule: Write the type of review you’d want to receive if you were the author. Even if you decide not to identify yourself in the review, you should write comments that you would be comfortable signing your name to.

In your comments, use phrases like “ the authors’ discussion of X” instead of “ your discussion of X .” This will depersonalize the feedback and keep the focus on the manuscript instead of the authors.

General guidelines for effective feedback

• Justify your recommendation with concrete evidence and specific examples.
• Be specific so the authors know what they need to do to improve.
• Be thorough. This might be the only time you read the manuscript.
• Be professional and respectful. The authors will be reading these comments too.
• Remember to say what you liked about the manuscript!

Don’t

• Recommend additional experiments or  unnecessary elements that are out of scope for the study or for the journal criteria.
• Tell the authors exactly how to revise their manuscript—you don’t need to do their work for them.
• Use the review to promote your own research or hypotheses.
• Focus on typos and grammar. If the manuscript needs significant editing for language and writing quality, just mention this in your comments.
• Submit your review without proofreading it and checking everything one more time.

Before and After: Sample Reviewer Comments

Keeping in mind the guidelines above, how do you put your thoughts into words? Here are some sample “before” and “after” reviewer comments

✗ Before

“The authors appear to have no idea what they are talking about. I don’t think they have read any of the literature on this topic.”

✓ After

“The study fails to address how the findings relate to previous research in this area. The authors should rewrite their Introduction and Discussion to reference the related literature, especially recently published work such as Darwin et al.”

“The writing is so bad, it is practically unreadable. I could barely bring myself to finish it.”

“While the study appears to be sound, the language is unclear, making it difficult to follow. I advise the authors work with a writing coach or copyeditor to improve the flow and readability of the text.”

“It’s obvious that this type of experiment should have been included. I have no idea why the authors didn’t use it. This is a big mistake.”

“The authors are off to a good start, however, this study requires additional experiments, particularly [type of experiment]. Alternatively, the authors should include more information that clarifies and justifies their choice of methods.”

Suggested Language for Tricky Situations

You might find yourself in a situation where you’re not sure how to explain the problem or provide feedback in a constructive and respectful way. Here is some suggested language for common issues you might experience.

What you think : The manuscript is fatally flawed. What you could say: “The study does not appear to be sound” or “the authors have missed something crucial”.

What you think : You don’t completely understand the manuscript. What you could say : “The authors should clarify the following sections to avoid confusion…”

What you think : The technical details don’t make sense. What you could say : “The technical details should be expanded and clarified to ensure that readers understand exactly what the researchers studied.”

What you think: The writing is terrible. What you could say : “The authors should revise the language to improve readability.”

What you think : The authors have over-interpreted the findings. What you could say : “The authors aim to demonstrate [XYZ], however, the data does not fully support this conclusion. Specifically…”

What does a good review look like?

Check out the peer review examples at F1000 Research to see how other reviewers write up their reports and give constructive feedback to authors.

Time to Submit the Review!

Be sure you turn in your report on time. Need an extension? Tell the journal so that they know what to expect. If you need a lot of extra time, the journal might need to contact other reviewers or notify the author about the delay.

Tip: Building a relationship with an editor

You’ll be more likely to be asked to review again if you provide high-quality feedback and if you turn in the review on time. Especially if it’s your first review for a journal, it’s important to show that you are reliable. Prove yourself once and you’ll get asked to review again!

• Getting started as a reviewer
• Responding to an invitation
• Reading a manuscript
• Writing a peer review

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

How to write a journal article review: What's in this Guide

• What's in this Guide
• What is a journal article?
• Create a template
• Choose your article to review
• Read your article carefully
• Do the writing
• Remember to edit
• Additional resources

What's in this guide?

This guide contains key resources for writing a journal article review.

Click the links below or the guide tabs above to find the following information

• find out what a journal article is
• learn how to use a template t o get you started
• explore strategies on how to choose the article for review
• learn how to read a journal article effectively and make notes
• understand the structure of a journal article review
• find tips on how to edit effectively
• access additional information 

Click below to view our related resources

Effective reading skills.

Find ways to make notes for researching

Note taking in lectures and tutorials

Get some great strategies and tips for taking notes in lectures and tutorials

Tips and strategies for preparing for, and sitting, an exam

Pathways and Academic Learning Support

• Next: What is a journal article? >>
• Last Updated: Apr 27, 2023 4:28 PM
• URL: https://libguides.newcastle.edu.au/how-to-write-a-journal-article-review

Page Content

Overview of the review report format, the first read-through, first read considerations, spotting potential major flaws, concluding the first reading, rejection after the first reading, before starting the second read-through, doing the second read-through, the second read-through: section by section guidance, how to structure your report, on presentation and style, criticisms & confidential comments to editors, the recommendation, when recommending rejection, additional resources, step by step guide to reviewing a manuscript.

When you receive an invitation to peer review, you should be sent a copy of the paper's abstract to help you decide whether you wish to do the review. Try to respond to invitations promptly - it will prevent delays. It is also important at this stage to declare any potential Conflict of Interest.

The structure of the review report varies between journals. Some follow an informal structure, while others have a more formal approach.

" Number your comments!!! " (Jonathon Halbesleben, former Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Informal Structure

Many journals don't provide criteria for reviews beyond asking for your 'analysis of merits'. In this case, you may wish to familiarize yourself with examples of other reviews done for the journal, which the editor should be able to provide or, as you gain experience, rely on your own evolving style.

Formal Structure

Other journals require a more formal approach. Sometimes they will ask you to address specific questions in your review via a questionnaire. Or they might want you to rate the manuscript on various attributes using a scorecard. Often you can't see these until you log in to submit your review. So when you agree to the work, it's worth checking for any journal-specific guidelines and requirements. If there are formal guidelines, let them direct the structure of your review.

In Both Cases

Whether specifically required by the reporting format or not, you should expect to compile comments to authors and possibly confidential ones to editors only.

Following the invitation to review, when you'll have received the article abstract, you should already understand the aims, key data and conclusions of the manuscript. If you don't, make a note now that you need to feedback on how to improve those sections.

The first read-through is a skim-read. It will help you form an initial impression of the paper and get a sense of whether your eventual recommendation will be to accept or reject the paper.

Keep a pen and paper handy when skim-reading.

Try to bear in mind the following questions - they'll help you form your overall impression:

• What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting?
• How original is the topic? What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
• Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read?
• Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? Do they address the main question posed?
• If the author is disagreeing significantly with the current academic consensus, do they have a substantial case? If not, what would be required to make their case credible?
• If the paper includes tables or figures, what do they add to the paper? Do they aid understanding or are they superfluous?

While you should read the whole paper, making the right choice of what to read first can save time by flagging major problems early on.

Editors say, " Specific recommendations for remedying flaws are VERY welcome ."

Examples of possibly major flaws include:

• Drawing a conclusion that is contradicted by the author's own statistical or qualitative evidence
• The use of a discredited method
• Ignoring a process that is known to have a strong influence on the area under study

If experimental design features prominently in the paper, first check that the methodology is sound - if not, this is likely to be a major flaw.

You might examine:

• The sampling in analytical papers
• The sufficient use of control experiments
• The precision of process data
• The regularity of sampling in time-dependent studies
• The validity of questions, the use of a detailed methodology and the data analysis being done systematically (in qualitative research)
• That qualitative research extends beyond the author's opinions, with sufficient descriptive elements and appropriate quotes from interviews or focus groups

Major Flaws in Information

If methodology is less of an issue, it's often a good idea to look at the data tables, figures or images first. Especially in science research, it's all about the information gathered. If there are critical flaws in this, it's very likely the manuscript will need to be rejected. Such issues include:

• Insufficient data
• Unclear data tables
• Contradictory data that either are not self-consistent or disagree with the conclusions
• Confirmatory data that adds little, if anything, to current understanding - unless strong arguments for such repetition are made

If you find a major problem, note your reasoning and clear supporting evidence (including citations).

After the initial read and using your notes, including those of any major flaws you found, draft the first two paragraphs of your review - the first summarizing the research question addressed and the second the contribution of the work. If the journal has a prescribed reporting format, this draft will still help you compose your thoughts.

The First Paragraph

This should state the main question addressed by the research and summarize the goals, approaches, and conclusions of the paper. It should:

• Help the editor properly contextualize the research and add weight to your judgement
• Show the author what key messages are conveyed to the reader, so they can be sure they are achieving what they set out to do
• Focus on successful aspects of the paper so the author gets a sense of what they've done well

The Second Paragraph

This should provide a conceptual overview of the contribution of the research. So consider:

• Is the paper's premise interesting and important?
• Are the methods used appropriate?
• Do the data support the conclusions?

After drafting these two paragraphs, you should be in a position to decide whether this manuscript is seriously flawed and should be rejected (see the next section). Or whether it is publishable in principle and merits a detailed, careful read through.

Even if you are coming to the opinion that an article has serious flaws, make sure you read the whole paper. This is very important because you may find some really positive aspects that can be communicated to the author. This could help them with future submissions.

A full read-through will also make sure that any initial concerns are indeed correct and fair. After all, you need the context of the whole paper before deciding to reject. If you still intend to recommend rejection, see the section "When recommending rejection."

Once the paper has passed your first read and you've decided the article is publishable in principle, one purpose of the second, detailed read-through is to help prepare the manuscript for publication. You may still decide to recommend rejection following a second reading.

" Offer clear suggestions for how the authors can address the concerns raised. In other words, if you're going to raise a problem, provide a solution ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Preparation

To save time and simplify the review:

• Don't rely solely upon inserting comments on the manuscript document - make separate notes
• Try to group similar concerns or praise together
• If using a review program to note directly onto the manuscript, still try grouping the concerns and praise in separate notes - it helps later
• Note line numbers of text upon which your notes are based - this helps you find items again and also aids those reading your review

Now that you have completed your preparations, you're ready to spend an hour or so reading carefully through the manuscript.

As you're reading through the manuscript for a second time, you'll need to keep in mind the argument's construction, the clarity of the language and content.

With regard to the argument’s construction, you should identify:

• Any places where the meaning is unclear or ambiguous
• Any factual errors
• Any invalid arguments

You may also wish to consider:

• Does the title properly reflect the subject of the paper?
• Does the abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper?
• Do the keywords accurately reflect the content?
• Is the paper an appropriate length?
• Are the key messages short, accurate and clear?

Not every submission is well written. Part of your role is to make sure that the text’s meaning is clear.

Editors say, " If a manuscript has many English language and editing issues, please do not try and fix it. If it is too bad, note that in your review and it should be up to the authors to have the manuscript edited ."

If the article is difficult to understand, you should have rejected it already. However, if the language is poor but you understand the core message, see if you can suggest improvements to fix the problem:

• Are there certain aspects that could be communicated better, such as parts of the discussion?
• Should the authors consider resubmitting to the same journal after language improvements?
• Would you consider looking at the paper again once these issues are dealt with?

On Grammar and Punctuation

Your primary role is judging the research content. Don't spend time polishing grammar or spelling. Editors will make sure that the text is at a high standard before publication. However, if you spot grammatical errors that affect clarity of meaning, then it's important to highlight these. Expect to suggest such amendments - it's rare for a manuscript to pass review with no corrections.

A 2010 study of nursing journals found that 79% of recommendations by reviewers were influenced by grammar and writing style (Shattel, et al., 2010).

1. The Introduction

A well-written introduction:

• Sets out the argument
• Summarizes recent research related to the topic
• Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in current knowledge
• Establishes the originality of the research aims by demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area
• Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the manuscript

Originality and Topicality

Originality and topicality can only be established in the light of recent authoritative research. For example, it's impossible to argue that there is a conflict in current understanding by referencing articles that are 10 years old.

Authors may make the case that a topic hasn't been investigated in several years and that new research is required. This point is only valid if researchers can point to recent developments in data gathering techniques or to research in indirectly related fields that suggest the topic needs revisiting. Clearly, authors can only do this by referencing recent literature. Obviously, where older research is seminal or where aspects of the methodology rely upon it, then it is perfectly appropriate for authors to cite some older papers.

Editors say, "Is the report providing new information; is it novel or just confirmatory of well-known outcomes ?"

It's common for the introduction to end by stating the research aims. By this point you should already have a good impression of them - if the explicit aims come as a surprise, then the introduction needs improvement.

2. Materials and Methods

Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust - and follow best practice.

Replicable Research

This makes sufficient use of:

• Control experiments
• Repeated analyses
• Repeated experiments

These are used to make sure observed trends are not due to chance and that the same experiment could be repeated by other researchers - and result in the same outcome. Statistical analyses will not be sound if methods are not replicable. Where research is not replicable, the paper should be recommended for rejection.

Repeatable Methods

These give enough detail so that other researchers are able to carry out the same research. For example, equipment used or sampling methods should all be described in detail so that others could follow the same steps. Where methods are not detailed enough, it's usual to ask for the methods section to be revised.

Robust Research

This has enough data points to make sure the data are reliable. If there are insufficient data, it might be appropriate to recommend revision. You should also consider whether there is any in-built bias not nullified by the control experiments.

Best Practice

During these checks you should keep in mind best practice:

• Standard guidelines were followed (e.g. the CONSORT Statement for reporting randomized trials)
• The health and safety of all participants in the study was not compromised
• Ethical standards were maintained

If the research fails to reach relevant best practice standards, it's usual to recommend rejection. What's more, you don't then need to read any further.

3. Results and Discussion

This section should tell a coherent story - What happened? What was discovered or confirmed?

Certain patterns of good reporting need to be followed by the author:

• They should start by describing in simple terms what the data show
• They should make reference to statistical analyses, such as significance or goodness of fit
• Once described, they should evaluate the trends observed and explain the significance of the results to wider understanding. This can only be done by referencing published research
• The outcome should be a critical analysis of the data collected

Discussion should always, at some point, gather all the information together into a single whole. Authors should describe and discuss the overall story formed. If there are gaps or inconsistencies in the story, they should address these and suggest ways future research might confirm the findings or take the research forward.

4. Conclusions

This section is usually no more than a few paragraphs and may be presented as part of the results and discussion, or in a separate section. The conclusions should reflect upon the aims - whether they were achieved or not - and, just like the aims, should not be surprising. If the conclusions are not evidence-based, it's appropriate to ask for them to be re-written.

5. Information Gathered: Images, Graphs and Data Tables

If you find yourself looking at a piece of information from which you cannot discern a story, then you should ask for improvements in presentation. This could be an issue with titles, labels, statistical notation or image quality.

Where information is clear, you should check that:

• The results seem plausible, in case there is an error in data gathering
• The trends you can see support the paper's discussion and conclusions
• There are sufficient data. For example, in studies carried out over time are there sufficient data points to support the trends described by the author?

You should also check whether images have been edited or manipulated to emphasize the story they tell. This may be appropriate but only if authors report on how the image has been edited (e.g. by highlighting certain parts of an image). Where you feel that an image has been edited or manipulated without explanation, you should highlight this in a confidential comment to the editor in your report.

6. List of References

You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and balance.

Where a cited article is central to the author's argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use citations differently. Otherwise, it's the editor’s role to exhaustively check the reference section for accuracy and format.

You should consider if the referencing is adequate:

• Are important parts of the argument poorly supported?
• Are there published studies that show similar or dissimilar trends that should be discussed?
• If a manuscript only uses half the citations typical in its field, this may be an indicator that referencing should be improved - but don't be guided solely by quantity
• References should be relevant, recent and readily retrievable

Check for a well-balanced list of references that is:

• Helpful to the reader
• Fair to competing authors
• Not over-reliant on self-citation
• Gives due recognition to the initial discoveries and related work that led to the work under assessment

You should be able to evaluate whether the article meets the criteria for balanced referencing without looking up every reference.

7. Plagiarism

By now you will have a deep understanding of the paper's content - and you may have some concerns about plagiarism.

Identified Concern

If you find - or already knew of - a very similar paper, this may be because the author overlooked it in their own literature search. Or it may be because it is very recent or published in a journal slightly outside their usual field.

You may feel you can advise the author how to emphasize the novel aspects of their own study, so as to better differentiate it from similar research. If so, you may ask the author to discuss their aims and results, or modify their conclusions, in light of the similar article. Of course, the research similarities may be so great that they render the work unoriginal and you have no choice but to recommend rejection.

"It's very helpful when a reviewer can point out recent similar publications on the same topic by other groups, or that the authors have already published some data elsewhere ." (Editor feedback)

Suspected Concern

If you suspect plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, but cannot recall or locate exactly what is being plagiarized, notify the editor of your suspicion and ask for guidance.

Most editors have access to software that can check for plagiarism.

Editors are not out to police every paper, but when plagiarism is discovered during peer review it can be properly addressed ahead of publication. If plagiarism is discovered only after publication, the consequences are worse for both authors and readers, because a retraction may be necessary.

For detailed guidelines see COPE's Ethical guidelines for reviewers and Wiley's Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics .

8. Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

After the detailed read-through, you will be in a position to advise whether the title, abstract and key words are optimized for search purposes. In order to be effective, good SEO terms will reflect the aims of the research.

A clear title and abstract will improve the paper's search engine rankings and will influence whether the user finds and then decides to navigate to the main article. The title should contain the relevant SEO terms early on. This has a major effect on the impact of a paper, since it helps it appear in search results. A poor abstract can then lose the reader's interest and undo the benefit of an effective title - whilst the paper's abstract may appear in search results, the potential reader may go no further.

So ask yourself, while the abstract may have seemed adequate during earlier checks, does it:

• Do justice to the manuscript in this context?
• Highlight important findings sufficiently?
• Present the most interesting data?

Editors say, " Does the Abstract highlight the important findings of the study ?"

If there is a formal report format, remember to follow it. This will often comprise a range of questions followed by comment sections. Try to answer all the questions. They are there because the editor felt that they are important. If you're following an informal report format you could structure your report in three sections: summary, major issues, minor issues.

• Give positive feedback first. Authors are more likely to read your review if you do so. But don't overdo it if you will be recommending rejection
• Briefly summarize what the paper is about and what the findings are
• Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge
• Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory
• Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness
• State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being overlooked

Major Issues

• Are there any major flaws? State what they are and what the severity of their impact is on the paper
• Has similar work already been published without the authors acknowledging this?
• Are the authors presenting findings that challenge current thinking? Is the evidence they present strong enough to prove their case? Have they cited all the relevant work that would contradict their thinking and addressed it appropriately?
• If major revisions are required, try to indicate clearly what they are
• Are there any major presentational problems? Are figures & tables, language and manuscript structure all clear enough for you to accurately assess the work?
• Are there any ethical issues? If you are unsure it may be better to disclose these in the confidential comments section

Minor Issues

• Are there places where meaning is ambiguous? How can this be corrected?
• Are the correct references cited? If not, which should be cited instead/also? Are citations excessive, limited, or biased?
• Are there any factual, numerical or unit errors? If so, what are they?
• Are all tables and figures appropriate, sufficient, and correctly labelled? If not, say which are not

Your review should ultimately help the author improve their article. So be polite, honest and clear. You should also try to be objective and constructive, not subjective and destructive.

You should also:

• Write clearly and so you can be understood by people whose first language is not English
• Avoid complex or unusual words, especially ones that would even confuse native speakers
• Number your points and refer to page and line numbers in the manuscript when making specific comments
• If you have been asked to only comment on specific parts or aspects of the manuscript, you should indicate clearly which these are
• Treat the author's work the way you would like your own to be treated

Most journals give reviewers the option to provide some confidential comments to editors. Often this is where editors will want reviewers to state their recommendation - see the next section - but otherwise this area is best reserved for communicating malpractice such as suspected plagiarism, fraud, unattributed work, unethical procedures, duplicate publication, bias or other conflicts of interest.

However, this doesn't give reviewers permission to 'backstab' the author. Authors can't see this feedback and are unable to give their side of the story unless the editor asks them to. So in the spirit of fairness, write comments to editors as though authors might read them too.

Reviewers should check the preferences of individual journals as to where they want review decisions to be stated. In particular, bear in mind that some journals will not want the recommendation included in any comments to authors, as this can cause editors difficulty later - see Section 11 for more advice about working with editors.

You will normally be asked to indicate your recommendation (e.g. accept, reject, revise and resubmit, etc.) from a fixed-choice list and then to enter your comments into a separate text box.

Recommending Acceptance

If you're recommending acceptance, give details outlining why, and if there are any areas that could be improved. Don't just give a short, cursory remark such as 'great, accept'. See Improving the Manuscript

Recommending Revision

Where improvements are needed, a recommendation for major or minor revision is typical. You may also choose to state whether you opt in or out of the post-revision review too. If recommending revision, state specific changes you feel need to be made. The author can then reply to each point in turn.

Some journals offer the option to recommend rejection with the possibility of resubmission – this is most relevant where substantial, major revision is necessary.

What can reviewers do to help? " Be clear in their comments to the author (or editor) which points are absolutely critical if the paper is given an opportunity for revisio n." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Recommending Rejection

If recommending rejection or major revision, state this clearly in your review (and see the next section, 'When recommending rejection').

Where manuscripts have serious flaws you should not spend any time polishing the review you've drafted or give detailed advice on presentation.

Editors say, " If a reviewer suggests a rejection, but her/his comments are not detailed or helpful, it does not help the editor in making a decision ."

In your recommendations for the author, you should:

• Give constructive feedback describing ways that they could improve the research
• Keep the focus on the research and not the author. This is an extremely important part of your job as a reviewer
• Avoid making critical confidential comments to the editor while being polite and encouraging to the author - the latter may not understand why their manuscript has been rejected. Also, they won't get feedback on how to improve their research and it could trigger an appeal

Remember to give constructive criticism even if recommending rejection. This helps developing researchers improve their work and explains to the editor why you felt the manuscript should not be published.

" When the comments seem really positive, but the recommendation is rejection…it puts the editor in a tough position of having to reject a paper when the comments make it sound like a great paper ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Visit our Wiley Author Learning and Training Channel for expert advice on peer review.

Watch the video, Ethical considerations of Peer Review

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

How to Fill a Flask: 8 Steps

3 ways to treat skin disease in hamsters, 4 ways to socialize a lory or lorikeet, how to water a christmas tree: 11 steps, 3 ways to make a professional rap music video, 9 simple ways to talk nerdy to someone, how to massage a baby: 15 steps, 3 ways to get rid of suckers from your rose bush, 11 simple ways to ask someone to kiss you, how to create your first java program on ubuntu linux, 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.

3 Ways to Tune an Acoustic Guitar

Sample Letter to Your Attorney Regarding Your Case

How to Organize a Lottery Pool: 12 Steps

How to Activate a Digi Sim Card: 4 Easy Steps

3 Ways to Convert Pierced Earrings to Clip On Earrings

4 Ways to Last Longer in Bed Naturally

How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

Did you know that article reviews are not just academic exercises but also a valuable skill in today's information age? In a world inundated with content, being able to dissect and evaluate articles critically can help you separate the wheat from the chaff. Whether you're a student aiming to excel in your coursework or a professional looking to stay well-informed, mastering the art of writing article reviews is an invaluable skill.

Short Description

In this article, our research paper writing service experts will start by unraveling the concept of article reviews and discussing the various types. You'll also gain insights into the art of formatting your review effectively. To ensure you're well-prepared, we'll take you through the pre-writing process, offering tips on setting the stage for your review. But it doesn't stop there. You'll find a practical example of an article review to help you grasp the concepts in action. To complete your journey, we'll guide you through the post-writing process, equipping you with essential proofreading techniques to ensure your work shines with clarity and precision!

What Is an Article Review: Grasping the Concept 

A review article is a type of professional paper writing that demands a high level of in-depth analysis and a well-structured presentation of arguments. It is a critical, constructive evaluation of literature in a particular field through summary, classification, analysis, and comparison.

If you write a scientific review, you have to use database searches to portray the research. Your primary goal is to summarize everything and present a clear understanding of the topic you've been working on.

Writing Involves:

• Summarization, classification, analysis, critiques, and comparison.
• The analysis, evaluation, and comparison require the use of theories, ideas, and research relevant to the subject area of the article.
• It is also worth nothing if a review does not introduce new information, but instead presents a response to another writer's work.
• Check out other samples to gain a better understanding of how to review the article.

Types of Review

When it comes to article reviews, there's more than one way to approach the task. Understanding the various types of reviews is like having a versatile toolkit at your disposal. In this section, we'll walk you through the different dimensions of review types, each offering a unique perspective and purpose. Whether you're dissecting a scholarly article, critiquing a piece of literature, or evaluating a product, you'll discover the diverse landscape of article reviews and how to navigate it effectively.

Journal Article Review

Just like other types of reviews, a journal article review assesses the merits and shortcomings of a published work. To illustrate, consider a review of an academic paper on climate change, where the writer meticulously analyzes and interprets the article's significance within the context of environmental science.

Research Article Review

Distinguished by its focus on research methodologies, a research article review scrutinizes the techniques used in a study and evaluates them in light of the subsequent analysis and critique. For instance, when reviewing a research article on the effects of a new drug, the reviewer would delve into the methods employed to gather data and assess their reliability.

Science Article Review

In the realm of scientific literature, a science article review encompasses a wide array of subjects. Scientific publications often provide extensive background information, which can be instrumental in conducting a comprehensive analysis. For example, when reviewing an article about the latest breakthroughs in genetics, the reviewer may draw upon the background knowledge provided to facilitate a more in-depth evaluation of the publication.

Need a Hand From Professionals?

Address to Our Writers and Get Assistance in Any Questions!

Formatting an Article Review

The format of the article should always adhere to the citation style required by your professor. If you're not sure, seek clarification on the preferred format and ask him to clarify several other pointers to complete the formatting of an article review adequately.

How Many Publications Should You Review?

• In what format should you cite your articles (MLA, APA, ASA, Chicago, etc.)?
• What length should your review be?
• Should you include a summary, critique, or personal opinion in your assignment?
• Do you need to call attention to a theme or central idea within the articles?
• Does your instructor require background information?

When you know the answers to these questions, you may start writing your assignment. Below are examples of MLA and APA formats, as those are the two most common citation styles.

Using the APA Format

Articles appear most commonly in academic journals, newspapers, and websites. If you write an article review in the APA format, you will need to write bibliographical entries for the sources you use:

• Web : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
• Journal : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Publication Year). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
• Newspaper : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Publication Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

Using MLA Format

• Web : Last, First Middle Initial. “Publication Title.” Website Title. Website Publisher, Date Month Year Published. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.
• Newspaper : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date, Month, Year Published: Page(s). Print.
• Journal : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year Published): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.

Enhance your writing effortlessly with EssayPro.com , where you can order an article review or any other writing task. Our team of expert writers specializes in various fields, ensuring your work is not just summarized, but deeply analyzed and professionally presented. Ideal for students and professionals alike, EssayPro offers top-notch writing assistance tailored to your needs. Elevate your writing today with our skilled team at your article review writing service !

The Pre-Writing Process

Facing this task for the first time can really get confusing and can leave you unsure of where to begin. To create a top-notch article review, start with a few preparatory steps. Here are the two main stages from our dissertation services to get you started:

Step 1: Define the right organization for your review. Knowing the future setup of your paper will help you define how you should read the article. Here are the steps to follow:

• Summarize the article — seek out the main points, ideas, claims, and general information presented in the article.
• Define the positive points — identify the strong aspects, ideas, and insightful observations the author has made.
• Find the gaps —- determine whether or not the author has any contradictions, gaps, or inconsistencies in the article and evaluate whether or not he or she used a sufficient amount of arguments and information to support his or her ideas.
• Identify unanswered questions — finally, identify if there are any questions left unanswered after reading the piece.

Step 2: Move on and review the article. Here is a small and simple guide to help you do it right:

• Start off by looking at and assessing the title of the piece, its abstract, introductory part, headings and subheadings, opening sentences in its paragraphs, and its conclusion.
• First, read only the beginning and the ending of the piece (introduction and conclusion). These are the parts where authors include all of their key arguments and points. Therefore, if you start with reading these parts, it will give you a good sense of the author's main points.
• Finally, read the article fully.

These three steps make up most of the prewriting process. After you are done with them, you can move on to writing your own review—and we are going to guide you through the writing process as well.

Outline and Template

As you progress with reading your article, organize your thoughts into coherent sections in an outline. As you read, jot down important facts, contributions, or contradictions. Identify the shortcomings and strengths of your publication. Begin to map your outline accordingly.

If your professor does not want a summary section or a personal critique section, then you must alleviate those parts from your writing. Much like other assignments, an article review must contain an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Thus, you might consider dividing your outline according to these sections as well as subheadings within the body. If you find yourself troubled with the pre-writing and the brainstorming process for this assignment, seek out a sample outline.

Your custom essay must contain these constituent parts:

• Pre-Title Page - Before diving into your review, start with essential details: article type, publication title, and author names with affiliations (position, department, institution, location, and email). Include corresponding author info if needed.
• Running Head - In APA format, use a concise title (under 40 characters) to ensure consistent formatting.
• Summary Page - Optional but useful. Summarize the article in 800 words, covering background, purpose, results, and methodology, avoiding verbatim text or references.
• Title Page - Include the full title, a 250-word abstract, and 4-6 keywords for discoverability.
• Introduction - Set the stage with an engaging overview of the article.
• Body - Organize your analysis with headings and subheadings.
• Works Cited/References - Properly cite all sources used in your review.
• Optional Suggested Reading Page - If permitted, suggest further readings for in-depth exploration.
• Tables and Figure Legends (if instructed by the professor) - Include visuals when requested by your professor for clarity.

Example of an Article Review

You might wonder why we've dedicated a section of this article to discuss an article review sample. Not everyone may realize it, but examining multiple well-constructed examples of review articles is a crucial step in the writing process. In the following section, our essay writing service experts will explain why.

Looking through relevant article review examples can be beneficial for you in the following ways:

• To get you introduced to the key works of experts in your field.
• To help you identify the key people engaged in a particular field of science.
• To help you define what significant discoveries and advances were made in your field.
• To help you unveil the major gaps within the existing knowledge of your field—which contributes to finding fresh solutions.
• To help you find solid references and arguments for your own review.
• To help you generate some ideas about any further field of research.
• To help you gain a better understanding of the area and become an expert in this specific field.
• To get a clear idea of how to write a good review.

View Our Writer’s Sample Before Crafting Your Own!

Why Have There Been No Great Female Artists?

Steps for Writing an Article Review

Here is a guide with critique paper format on how to write a review paper:

Step 1: Write the Title

First of all, you need to write a title that reflects the main focus of your work. Respectively, the title can be either interrogative, descriptive, or declarative.

Step 2: Cite the Article

Next, create a proper citation for the reviewed article and input it following the title. At this step, the most important thing to keep in mind is the style of citation specified by your instructor in the requirements for the paper. For example, an article citation in the MLA style should look as follows:

Author's last and first name. "The title of the article." Journal's title and issue(publication date): page(s). Print

Abraham John. "The World of Dreams." Virginia Quarterly 60.2(1991): 125-67. Print.

Step 3: Article Identification

After your citation, you need to include the identification of your reviewed article:

• Title of the article
• Title of the journal
• Year of publication

All of this information should be included in the first paragraph of your paper.

The report "Poverty increases school drop-outs" was written by Brian Faith – a Health officer – in 2000.

Step 4: Introduction

Your organization in an assignment like this is of the utmost importance. Before embarking on your writing process, you should outline your assignment or use an article review template to organize your thoughts coherently.

• If you are wondering how to start an article review, begin with an introduction that mentions the article and your thesis for the review.
• Follow up with a summary of the main points of the article.
• Highlight the positive aspects and facts presented in the publication.
• Critique the publication by identifying gaps, contradictions, disparities in the text, and unanswered questions.

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Make a summary of the article by revisiting what the author has written about. Note any relevant facts and findings from the article. Include the author's conclusions in this section.

Step 6: Critique It

Present the strengths and weaknesses you have found in the publication. Highlight the knowledge that the author has contributed to the field. Also, write about any gaps and/or contradictions you have found in the article. Take a standpoint of either supporting or not supporting the author's assertions, but back up your arguments with facts and relevant theories that are pertinent to that area of knowledge. Rubrics and templates can also be used to evaluate and grade the person who wrote the article.

Step 7: Craft a Conclusion

In this section, revisit the critical points of your piece, your findings in the article, and your critique. Also, write about the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the results of the article review. Present a way forward for future research in the field of study. Before submitting your article, keep these pointers in mind:

• As you read the article, highlight the key points. This will help you pinpoint the article's main argument and the evidence that they used to support that argument.
• While you write your review, use evidence from your sources to make a point. This is best done using direct quotations.
• Select quotes and supporting evidence adequately and use direct quotations sparingly. Take time to analyze the article adequately.
• Every time you reference a publication or use a direct quotation, use a parenthetical citation to avoid accidentally plagiarizing your article.
• Re-read your piece a day after you finish writing it. This will help you to spot grammar mistakes and to notice any flaws in your organization.
• Use a spell-checker and get a second opinion on your paper.

The Post-Writing Process: Proofread Your Work

Finally, when all of the parts of your article review are set and ready, you have one last thing to take care of — proofreading. Although students often neglect this step, proofreading is a vital part of the writing process and will help you polish your paper to ensure that there are no mistakes or inconsistencies.

To proofread your paper properly, start by reading it fully and checking the following points:

• Punctuation
• Other mistakes

Afterward, take a moment to check for any unnecessary information in your paper and, if found, consider removing it to streamline your content. Finally, double-check that you've covered at least 3-4 key points in your discussion.

And remember, if you ever need help with proofreading, rewriting your essay, or even want to buy essay , our friendly team is always here to assist you.

Need an Article REVIEW WRITTEN?

Just send us the requirements to your paper and watch one of our writers crafting an original paper for you.

What Is A Review Article?

How to write an article review, how to write an article review in apa format, related articles.

Article Review

Article Review Writing: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide with Examples

People also read

Learn How to Write an Editorial on Any Topic

Best Tips on How to Avoid Plagiarism

How to Write a Movie Review - Guide & Examples

A Complete Guide on How to Write a Summary for Students

Write Opinion Essay Like a Pro: A Detailed Guide

Evaluation Essay - Definition, Examples, and Writing Tips

How to Write a Thematic Statement - Tips & Examples

How to Write a Bio - Quick Tips, Structure & Examples

How to Write a Synopsis – A Simple Format & Guide

How to Write a Comparative Essay – A Complete Guide

Visual Analysis Essay - A Writing Guide with Format & Sample

List of Common Social Issues Around the World

Writing Character Analysis - Outline, Steps, and Examples

11 Common Types of Plagiarism Explained Through Examples

A Detailed Guide on How to Write a Poem Step by Step

Detailed Guide on Appendix Writing: With Tips and Examples

Struggling to write a review that people actually want to read? Feeling lost in the details and wondering how to make your analysis stand out?

You're not alone!

Many writers find it tough to navigate the world of article reviews, not sure where to start or how to make their reviews really grab attention.

No worries! 

In this blog, we're going to guide you through the process of writing an article review that stands out. We'll also share tips, and examples to make this process easier for you.

Let’s get started.

• 1. What is an Article Review?
• 2. Types of Article Reviews
• 3. Article Review Format
• 4. How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps
• 5. Article Review Outline
• 6. Article Review Examples
• 7. Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

What is an Article Review?

An article review is a critical evaluation and analysis of a piece of writing, typically an academic or journalistic article. 

It goes beyond summarizing the content; it involves an in-depth examination of the author's ideas, arguments, and methodologies. 

The goal is to provide a well-rounded understanding of the article's strengths, weaknesses, and overall contribution to the field.

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Types of Article Reviews

Article reviews come in various forms, each serving a distinct purpose in the realm of academic or professional discourse. Understanding these types is crucial for tailoring your approach. 

Here are some common types of article reviews:

Journal Article Review

A journal article review involves a thorough evaluation of scholarly articles published in academic journals. 

It requires summarizing the article's key points, methodology, and findings, emphasizing its contributions to the academic field. 

Take a look at the following example to help you understand better.

Example of Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

A research article review focuses on scrutinizing articles with a primary emphasis on research.

This type of review involves evaluating the research design, methodology, results, and their broader implications. 

Discussions on the interpretation of results, limitations, and the article's overall contributions are key. 

Here is a sample for you to get an idea.

Example of Research Article Review

Science Article Review

A science article review specifically addresses articles within scientific disciplines. It includes summarizing scientific concepts, hypotheses, and experimental methods.

The type of review assesses the reliability of the experimental design, and evaluates the author's interpretation of findings. 

Take a look at the following example.

Example of Science Article Review

Critical Review

A critical review involves a balanced critique of a given article. It encompasses providing a comprehensive summary, highlighting key points, and engaging in a critical analysis of strengths and weaknesses. 

To get a clearer idea of a critical review, take a look at this example.

Critical Review Example

Article Review Format

When crafting an article review in either APA or MLA format, it's crucial to adhere to the specific guidelines for citing sources. 

Below are the bibliographical entries for different types of sources in both APA and MLA styles:

How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps

Writing an effective article review involves a systematic approach. Follow this step-by-step process to ensure a comprehensive and well-structured analysis.

Step 1: Understand the Assignment

Before diving into the review, carefully read and understand the assignment guidelines. 

Pay attention to specific requirements, such as word count, formatting style (APA, MLA), and the aspects your instructor wants you to focus on.

Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly

Begin by thoroughly reading the article. Take notes on key points, arguments, and evidence presented by the author. 

Understand the author's main thesis and the context in which the article was written.

Step 3: Create a Summary

Summarize the main points of the article. Highlight the author's key arguments and findings. 

While writing the summary ensure that you capture the essential elements of the article to provide context for your analysis.

Step 4: Identify the Author's Thesis

In this step, pinpoint the author's main thesis or central argument. Understand the purpose of the article and how the author supports their position. 

This will serve as a foundation for your critique.

Step 5: Evaluate the Author's Evidence and Methodology

Examine the evidence provided by the author to support their thesis. Assess the reliability and validity of the methodology used. 

Consider the sources, data collection methods, and any potential biases.

Step 6: Analyze the Author's Writing Style

Evaluate the author's writing style and how effectively they communicate their ideas. 

Consider the clarity of the language, the organization of the content, and the overall persuasiveness of the article.

Step 7: Consider the Article's Contribution

Reflect on the article's contribution to its field of study. Analyze how it fits into the existing literature, its significance, and any potential implications for future research or applications.

Step 8: Write the Introduction

Craft an introduction that includes the article's title, author, publication date, and a brief overview. 

State the purpose of your review and your thesis—the main point you'll be analyzing in your review.

Step 9: Develop the Body of the Review

Organize your review by addressing specific aspects such as the author's thesis, methodology, writing style, and the article's contribution. 

Use clear paragraphs to structure your analysis logically.

Step 10: Conclude with a Summary and Evaluation

Summarize your main points and restate your overall assessment of the article. 

Offer insights into its strengths and weaknesses, and conclude with any recommendations for improvement or suggestions for further research.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Article Review Outline

Creating a well-organized outline is an essential part of writing a coherent and insightful article review.

This outline given below will guide you through the key sections of your review, ensuring that your analysis is comprehensive and logically structured.

Refer to the following template to understand outlining the article review in detail.

Article Review Format Template

Article Review Examples

Examining article review examples can provide valuable insights into the structure, tone, and depth of analysis expected. 

Below are sample article reviews, each illustrating a different approach and focus.

Example of Article Review

Sample of article review assignment pdf

Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

Crafting an effective article review involves a combination of critical analysis, clarity, and structure. 

Here are some valuable tips to guide you through the process:

• Start with a Clear Introduction

Kick off your article review by introducing the article's main points and mentioning the publication date, which you can find on the re-title page. Outline the topics you'll cover in your review.

• Concise Summary with Unanswered Questions

Provide a short summary of the article, emphasizing its main ideas. Highlight any lingering questions, known as "unanswered questions," that the article may have triggered. Use a basic article review template to help structure your thoughts.

• Illustrate with Examples

Use examples from the article to illustrate your points. If there are tables or figures in the article, discuss them to make your review more concrete and easily understandable.

• Organize Clearly with a Summary Section

Keep your review straightforward and well-organized. Begin with the start of the article, express your thoughts on what you liked or didn't like, and conclude with a summary section. This follows a basic plan for clarity.

• Constructive Criticism

When providing criticism, be constructive. If there are elements you don't understand, frame them as "unanswered questions." This approach shows engagement and curiosity.

• Smoothly Connect Your Ideas

Ensure your thoughts flow naturally throughout your review. Use simple words and sentences. If you have questions about the article, let them guide your review organically.

• Revise and Check for Clarity

Before finishing, go through your review. Correct any mistakes and ensure it sounds clear. Check if you followed your plan, used simple words, and incorporated the keywords effectively. This makes your review better and more accessible for others.

In conclusion , writing an effective article review involves a thoughtful balance of summarizing key points, and addressing unanswered questions. 

By following a simple and structured approach, you can create a review that not only analyzes the content but also adds value to the reader's understanding.

Remember to organize your thoughts logically, use clear language, and provide examples from the article to support your points. 

Ready to elevate your article reviewing skills? Explore the valuable resources and expert assistance at MyPerfectWords.com. 

Our team of experienced writers is here to help you with article reviews and other school tasks. 

So why wait? Get our essay writing service today!

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

• 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 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
• This Or That Game New
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications

How to Review & Evaluate a Journal Publication

Last Updated: January 8, 2024 Fact Checked

Active Reading

Critical evaluation, final review.

This article was co-authored by Richard Perkins . Richard Perkins is a Writing Coach, Academic English Coordinator, and the Founder of PLC Learning Center. With over 24 years of education experience, he gives teachers tools to teach writing to students and works with elementary to university level students to become proficient, confident writers. Richard is a fellow at the National Writing Project. As a teacher leader and consultant at California State University Long Beach's Global Education Project, Mr. Perkins creates and presents teacher workshops that integrate the U.N.'s 17 Sustainable Development Goals in the K-12 curriculum. He holds a BA in Communications and TV from The University of Southern California and an MEd from California State University Dominguez Hills. 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 149,263 times.

Whether you’re publishing a journal article review or completing one for a class, your critique should be fair, thorough, and constructive. Don't worry—this article will walk you through exactly how to review a journal article step-by-step. Keep reading for tips on how to analyze the article, assess how successful it is, and put your thoughts into words. 

• Familiarizing yourself with format and style guidelines is especially important if you haven’t published with that journal in the past. For example, a journal might require you to recommend an article for publication, meet a certain word count, or provide revisions that the authors should make.
• If you’re reviewing a journal article for a school assignment, familiarize yourself the guidelines your instructor provided.

• While giving the article a closer read, gauge whether and how well the article resolves its central problem. Ask yourself, “Is this investigation important, and does it uniquely contribute to its field?”
• At this stage, note any terminological inconsistencies, organizational problems, typos, and formatting issues.

• How well does the abstract summarize the article, the problem it addresses, its techniques, results, and significance? For example, you might find that an abstract describes a pharmaceutical study's topic and skips to results without discussing the experiment's methods with much detail.
• Does the introduction map out the article’s structure? Does it clearly lay out the groundwork? A good introduction gives you a clear idea of what to expect in the coming sections. It might state the problem and hypothesis, briefly describe the investigation's methods, then state whether the experiment proved or disproved the hypothesis.

• If necessary, spend some time perusing copies of the article’s sources so you can better understand the topic’s existing literature.
• A good literature review will say something like, "Smith and Jones, in their authoritative 2015 study, demonstrated that adult men and women responded favorably to the treatment. However, no research on the topic has examined the technique's effects and safety in children and adolescents, which is what we sought to explore in our current work."

• For example, you might observe that subjects in medical study didn’t accurately represent a diverse population.

• For example, you might find that tables list too much undigested data that the authors don’t adequately summarize within the text.

• For example, if you’re reviewing an art history article, decide whether it analyzes an artwork reasonably or simply leaps to conclusions. A reasonable analysis might argue, “The artist was a member of Rembrandt’s workshop, which is evident in the painting’s dramatic light and sensual texture.”

• Is the language clear and unambiguous, or does excessive jargon interfere with its ability to make an argument?
• Are there places that are too wordy? Can any ideas be stated in a simpler way?
• Are grammar, punctuation, and terminology correct?

• Your thesis and evidence should be constructive and thoughtful. Point out both strengths and weaknesses, and propose alternative solutions instead of focusing only on weaknesses.
• A good, constructive thesis would be, “The article demonstrates that the drug works better than a placebo in specific demographics, but future research that includes a more diverse subject sampling is necessary.”

• The introduction summarizes the article and states your thesis.
• The body provides specific examples from the text that support your thesis.
• The conclusion summarizes your review, restates your thesis, and offers suggestion for future research.

• Make sure your writing is clear, concise, and logical. If you mention that an article is too verbose, your own writing shouldn’t be full of unnecessarily complicated terms and sentences.
• If possible, have someone familiar with the topic read your draft and offer feedback.

Community Q&A

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://www.science.org/content/article/how-review-paper
• ↑ https://www.uis.edu/learning-hub/writing-resources/handouts/learning-hub/how-to-review-a-journal-article
• ↑ http://library.queensu.ca/inforef/criticalreview.htm

About This Article

If you want to review a journal article, you’ll need to carefully read it through and come up with a thesis for your piece. Read the article once to get a general idea of what it says, then read it through again and make detailed notes. You should focus on things like whether the introduction gives a good overview of the topic, whether the writing is concise, and whether the results are presented clearly. When you write your review, present both strengths and weaknesses of the article so you’re giving a balanced assessment. Back up your points with examples in the main body of your review, which will make it more credible. You should also ensure your thesis about the article is clear by mentioning it in the introduction and restating it in the conclusion of your review. For tips on how to edit your review before publication, keep reading! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Jun 30, 2019

Did this article help you?

Laura Drawls

Aug 26, 2017

Oct 29, 2019

Sep 27, 2018

Sarah Corduroy

Dec 5, 2022

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

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

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Article review writing format, steps, examples and illustration PDF Compiled by Mohammed Yismaw

2021, Article review writing format, steps, examples and illustration PDF Compiled by Mohammed Yismaw

The purpose of this document is to help students and researchers understand how a review of an academic journal is conducted and reported in different fields of study. Review articles in academic journals that analyze or discuss researches previously published by others, rather than reporting new research results or findings. Summaries and critiques are two ways to write a review of a scientific journal article. Both types of writing ask you first to read and understand an article from the primary literature about your topic. The summary involves briefly but accurately stating the key points of the article for a reader who has not read the original article. The critique begins by summarizing the article and then analyzes and evaluates the author’s research. Summaries and critiques help you learn to synthesize information from different sources and are usually limited to two pages maximum.

Related Papers

Harald von Kortzfleisch , Christoph Kahle

Neue Technologien und Innovationen stellen heutzutage wichtige Schlüsselelemente der Wachstums und Erfolgssicherung von Unternehmen dar. Durch einen in Geschwindigkeit und Intensität immer schneller zunehmenden Wettbewerb nehmen Innovationen eine immer zentralere Rolle im Praxisalltag von Unternehmen ein. Dieser technische Fortschritt treibt auch in der Wissenschaft das Thema des Innovationsmanagements in den letzten Jahrzehnten immer stärker voran und wird dort ausgiebig diskutiert. Die Bedeutung von Innovationen wächst dabei ebenfalls aus der Sicht der Kunden, welche heutzutage viel differenzierter als früher Produkte und Dienste nachfragen und somit Unternehmen vor neue Herausforderungen stellen. Überdies stellen Innovationen heute ein entscheidendes Bindeglied zwischen Marktorientierung und erhofften Unternehmenserfolg dar. Seit einigen Jahren lässt sich eine Öffnung der Unternehmensgrenzen für externe Quellen wie Kunden, Zulieferer, Universitäten oder teilweise auch M...

SSRN Electronic Journal

Helmut Krcmar

Dominic Lindner

Alexandra Waluszewski

Research Policy

Nuria Gonzalez Alvarez

Creativity and Innovation Management

Matti Pihlajamaa

Firms tap into user knowledge to learn about the users’ needs. While users have been recognized as a valuable source of knowledge for innovation, few studies have investigated how their knowledge is integrated into innovation processes in the context of complex products and systems (CoPS). The purpose of this study is to reveal the practices of CoPS manufacturers to facilitate user knowledge utilization for innovation. We investigate two case companies, a medical device manufacturer and an aircraft manufacturer, and report on seven managerial practices for utilizing user knowledge. We adopt the absorptive capacity model in structuring our findings and elaborate three of the model's sub-capabilities (recognition of the value of user knowledge, acquisition of user knowledge, and assimilation/transformation of user knowledge) by proposing that each is associated with a distinct managerial goal and related practices: (1) Sensitizing the organization to the innovation potential of user knowledge, (2) identifying and gaining access to suitable user knowledge, and (3) analyzing and interpreting user knowledge and integrating it into product development. Our study contributes to the innovation management literature by analyzing the capabilities required to utilize user knowledge throughout the CoPS innovation process.

Information & Management

Diffusion of digital technologies into the manufacturing industry has created new opportunities for innovation that firms must address to remain competitive. We investigate the role of customer and user knowledge in the digital innovation processes of three global B2B manufacturing companies. We find that the B2B manufacturing industry's characteristics influence how users and customers may be leveraged. Customers making the purchasing decisions are considered for knowledge about short-term changes in market needs, while users working directly with the products provide long-term guidance for digital innovation. We identify practices for acquiring, distributing, and using customer and user knowledge for digital innovation.

Journal of business market management

Patricia Sandmeier

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation JEMI

Given the rising role of users in innovation processes and the increasing amount of research in this field the aim of this paper is to explore the limits of our understanding of the user innovation (UI) concept. In doing so, the study addresses four basic questions: (1) Why do users create and share innovation? (2) Who is the user-innovator? (3) What type of innovation do users create? (4) How do users innovate? The results of a systematic literature review identified the main research streams on user innovation, together with weaknesses of past research and perspectives for future studies.

RELATED PAPERS

Gernot Grabher

Journal of Computer‐ …

Petra Schubert , Kathrin Möslein

Mossimo Sesom

Shahab Zare

Arthur Shulman

International Journal of Technology Management

Richard Farr

European Journal of Dental Education

Y.P. CHANDRA

Chandra Yanto

Management Science

John Roberts

Maria Antikainen

Johanna Bragge

intechopen.com

Ivona Vrdoljak Raguz

Service Science

Tuure Tuunanen

Jouni K Juntunen

Benji Decker

Eva Heiskanen

Handbook of Marketing

Jerome Hauser

Service Industries Journal

Christian Kowalkowski

Journal of Engineering Design

Ola Isaksson , Anna Rönnbäck

Journal of Management

Bettina Bastian

International Journal of Innovation Management

Harald von Kortzfleisch

Guido H Baltes

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

Raimo Lovio

Marco Bertoni , Christian Johansson

Dominik Walcher

Managing Service Quality

Tor W. Andreassen

Journal of Product Innovation Management

Gary Schirr

System Sciences, 2004. …

Ralf Reichwald , Dominik Walcher

Edina Vadovics

Jouni Similä

Luis Cancino Muñoz

Shell Artillery

Ralf Reichwald

Journal of the Academy of …

Ian Wilkinson , Subroto Roy

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Search Menu
• Advance Articles
• Editor's Choice
• CME Reviews
• Best of 2021 collection
• Abbreviated Breast MRI Virtual Collection
• Contrast-enhanced Mammography Collection
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Accepted Papers Resource Guide
• About Journal of Breast Imaging
• About the Society of Breast Imaging
• Guidelines for Reviewers
• Resources for Reviewers and Authors
• Editorial Board
• Advertising Disclaimer
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• Introduction
• Selection of a Topic
• Scientific Literature Search and Analysis
• Structure of a Scientific Review Article
• Tips for Success
• Acknowledgments
• Conflict of Interest Statement
• < Previous

A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Review Article

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Manisha Bahl, A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Review Article, Journal of Breast Imaging , Volume 5, Issue 4, July/August 2023, Pages 480–485, https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbad028

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Scientific review articles are comprehensive, focused reviews of the scientific literature written by subject matter experts. The task of writing a scientific review article can seem overwhelming; however, it can be managed by using an organized approach and devoting sufficient time to the process. The process involves selecting a topic about which the authors are knowledgeable and enthusiastic, conducting a literature search and critical analysis of the literature, and writing the article, which is composed of an abstract, introduction, body, and conclusion, with accompanying tables and figures. This article, which focuses on the narrative or traditional literature review, is intended to serve as a guide with practical steps for new writers. Tips for success are also discussed, including selecting a focused topic, maintaining objectivity and balance while writing, avoiding tedious data presentation in a laundry list format, moving from descriptions of the literature to critical analysis, avoiding simplistic conclusions, and budgeting time for the overall process.

• narrative discourse

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Librarian
• Journals Career Network

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 2631-6129
• Print ISSN 2631-6110
• Copyright © 2024 Society of Breast Imaging
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

How to Write an Article Review: Tips, Outline, Format

Have you been assigned an article review paper, but you are unsure where to start, or what is a review article at all? There is no need to worry, as EssayService has put together a top guide for you! Find out all about an article review to master your assignment.

What is an Article Review?

In simple terms, an article review essay is like a summary and evaluation of another professional or expert's work. It may also be referred to as a literature review that includes an outline of the most recent research on the subject, or a critical review that focuses on a specific article with smaller scope. Article review can be used for many reasons; for example, a teacher or lecturer may wish to introduce their students to a new subject by reviewing a professional's piece. You can also learn about the most important works of specialists in your industry by looking at relevant article review examples.

Also, a newspaper article review example could be a journalist writing a critique about another competitor's published work.

In comparison, a book review article example could be critiqued by a fellow author or even a student in the chosen field.

Depending on the critique criteria and the work being reviewed, there could also be certain points asked for addition which should be checked and noted by the lecturer or supervisor. Otherwise, follow the article review guidelines from our write my essay service to complete the assignment in no time.

Key points when writing an article review:

Use the article review template from our paper writing service to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

How to Start an Article Review?

• Firstly read the work being reviewed as much as possible and look up key phrases and words that are not understood.
• Discuss the work with other professionals or colleagues to collect more opinions and get a more balanced impression.
• Highlight important sections or sentences and refer this to your knowledge in the topic, do you agree or disagree and what does this contribute to the field?
• Then re-write the key arguments and findings into your own words this will help gain better understanding into the paper. This can be just written as an outline also and will help decide which points are wanted to discuss later.

If you feel you do not have enough time to create a critique worthy of your time, then come to EssayService and order a custom Article review online.

You can order essay independent of type, for example:

• nursing essay;
• law essay writing;
• history essays.

The best way to write an effective essay would be to draw up a plan or outline of what needs to be covered and use it for guidance throughout the critique.

Article Review Formatting

There is no one-fits-all article format you can follow in your review. In fact, the formatting is dictated by the citation style specified by your professor in the task requirements. Thus, be sure to clarify the preferred style before you jump straight to writing to handle the given assignment right.

APA Format Article Review

Writing an APA style article review, you will most likely use articles from journals, websites, and newspapers. For each source, you will have to create properly formatted bibliographical entries.

Here is how to write an article review APA:

• Journal: Author’s last name, First and middle initial. (Year of Publication). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
• Website: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
• Newspaper: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

MLA Format Article Review

Tips for citing sources in an article review MLA format:

• Journal: Last name, First name Middle initial. “Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year of Publication): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Accessed.
• Website: Last, First M. “Title.” Website Title. Publisher, Date Published. Web. Date Accessed.
• Newspaper: Last, First M. “Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date of Publication: Page(s). Print.

Article Review Outline

Planning out an outline for your paper will help writing and to put it together so therefore saving you time in the long run.

Some questions to help with the outline of a critique:

• What does the article set out to do or prove?
• Are the main ideas clear and defined?
• How substantial is the evidence?
• Where does the article fit in its specific field?
• Does it provide new knowledge on the topic?
• What are the central theories and assumptions?
• Is the writer conclusive at getting their point across?

Here is a typical article review format to follow:

Use our article review template to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

Article Review Title

Firstly start with creating a title for your critique, this should be something to do with the focus of the work that is being reviewed. An approach could be to make it descriptive or also in a more creative way think of something that intrigues the reader. After the title, this is a good place to correctly cite the paper being critiqued and include the important details for example, the author, title of publication, any page references. The style in which the citation is written will depend on which is best for this type of work being reviewed.

Article Review Introduction

The introduction should be a brief glimpse into what the author was writing about and any other details the audience will find interesting. Maybe some background details on the piece that is not already known or something that contributes to the review itself. It is a good idea to start by introducing the work at the start of the paragraph and then include a ' hook '. Include the writer's thesis if there is one and put it at the end but include your own thesis towards the critique near the beginning of this section.

Article Review Body

When constructing the summary section, write down the important points and findings in the piece in your own words. Include how the claims are supported and backed up with evidence but use direct quotes as sparing as possible. Do not put in any information known to professionals in the field or topic, but detail any conclusions the work came to. Make sure the paper is not just copied word for word and is actually summarized by yourself; this will also help the review stage.

To make an accurate critique, break down the work and express opinions on whether it achieves its goals and how useful it is in explaining the topics for an article review. Decide if the paper contributes to its field and is important and credible to the given field. Back up all the claims with evidence from the summary or another source. If using another text, remember to cite it correctly in the bibliography section. Look at how strong the points are and do they contribute to the argument. Try to identify any biases the writer might have and use this to make a fair critique. This part is only for opinions of the piece's significance, not including whether you liked it. Furthermore, the different types of audiences that would benefit from the paper can be mentioned in this section.

Article Review Conclusion

In the conclusion section of the critique, there should only be one or two paragraphs in which a summary of key points and opinions in the piece are included. Also, summarize the paper's significance to its field and how accurate the work is. Depending on the type of critique or work evaluated, it is also possible to include comments on future research or the topic to be discussed further.

If other sources have been used, construct a bibliography section and correctly cite all works utilized in the critique. 

The APA format is very common in an article review and stands for American Psychology Association. This will include a 'references list' at the end of the critique and in-text citations, mentioning the author's last name, page number, and publication date.

There are also MLA and Chicago formats for citations with slight differences in a name, like using a 'works cited' page for MLA. More can be found in this guide on the subtle differences between the types of citation methods under the heading 'Creating a bibliography.'

Article Review Example

Article review writing tips.

If you are interested in best scholarships for high school seniors , the following tips will be handy while writing your essay or article:

• Allow enough time to complete the research and writing of the critique. The number one problem with creating a critique is running out of time to make it the best it can be. This can be avoided by effective planning and keeping on time with the deadlines you set out.
• Collect twice more research than you think is needed to write a review. This will help when coming to the writing stage as not all the information collected will be used in the final draft.
• Write in a style that is compatible with the work being critiqued. This will be better for whoever requested the critique and also will make paper easier to construct.
• A summary and evaluation must be written. Do not leave out either part as one complements the other and is vital to create a critique worth reading.
• Be clear and explain well every statement made about the piece . Everything that is unknown to professionals in the field should be explained and all comments should be easy to follow for the reader.
• Do not just describe the work, analyze and interpret it. The critique should be in depth and give the audience some detailed interpretations of the work in a professional way.
• Give an assessment of the quality in the writing and of what standard it is. Evaluate every aspect in the paper so that the audience can see where it fits into the rest of the related works. Give opinions based on fact and do not leave any comments without reason as this will not count for anything.

How to Write an Article Review?

Writing a review article is not that hard if you know what steps to take. Below is a step-by-step guide on how to write a review example quickly and easily.

• Before You Start

Before you start writing your review essay, there are a few pre-writing steps to take. The pre-writing process should consist of the following steps:

• Pick the subject of your review (if it wasn’t specified by your professor);
• Read the article fully multiple times;
• Summarize the main ideas, points, and claims made in the article;
• Define the positive (strong) aspects;
• Identify the gaps or inconsistencies;
• Find the questions that remained unanswered.

All these steps are needed to help you define the direction for your review article and find the main ideas you’d like to cover in it.

After you review articles and define the key ideas, gaps, and other details, map out your future paper by creating a detailed outline.

Here are the core elements that must be included:

• Pre-title page;
• Corresponding author details (optional);
• Running head (only for the APA style);
• Summary page (optional);
• Title page;
• Introduction;
• References/Works Cited;
• Suggested Reading page (optional);
• Tables and Figure Legends (if required by the professor).

This step is vital to organize your thoughts and ensure a proper structure of your work. Thus, be sure not to skip this step.

When you have an outline, students can move on to the writing stage by formulating compelling titles for their article reviews. Titles should be declarative, interrogative, or descriptive to reflect the core focus of the paper.

• Article Citation

After the title should follow a proper citation of the piece you are going to review. Write a citation according to the required style, and feel free to check out a well-written article review example to see how it should look like.

• Article Identification

Start the first paragraph of your review with concise and clear article identification that specifies its title, author, name of the resource (e.g., journal, web, etc.), and the year of publication.

Following the identification, write a short introductory paragraph. It should be to the point and state a clear thesis for your review.

• Summary and Critique

In the main body of your article review, you should first make a detailed but not too extensive summary of the article you reviewed, its main ideas, statements, and findings. In this part, you should also reflect on the conclusion made by the author of the original article.

After a general summary should follow an objective critique. In this part of your paper, you have to state and analyze the main strengths and weaknesses of the article. Also, you need to point out any gaps or unanswered questions that are still there. And clarify your stance on the author’s assertions.

Lastly, you need to craft a compelling conclusion that recaps the key points of your review and gives the final, logical evaluation of the piece that was reviewed.

After this, proofread your work and submit it.

No Time Left For Your Due Assignment

Now we hope you understand how to write a review of an article. However, we know that writing a great article review requires a lot of time to properly research the work. To save your precious time, visit EssayService, where our team of top essay writers will help you. The team can even provide you with the best article review topics! You can learn more at the college essay writing service page where we have free guides with all the essay writing tips and tricks!

Frequently asked questions

She was flawless! first time using a website like this, I've ordered article review and i totally adored it! grammar punctuation, content - everything was on point

This writer is my go to, because whenever I need someone who I can trust my task to - I hire Joy. She wrote almost every paper for me for the last 2 years

Term paper done up to a highest standard, no revisions, perfect communication. 10s across the board!!!!!!!

I send him instructions and that's it. my paper was done 10 hours later, no stupid questions, he nailed it.

Sometimes I wonder if Michael is secretly a professor because he literally knows everything. HE DID SO WELL THAT MY PROF SHOWED MY PAPER AS AN EXAMPLE. unbelievable, many thanks

You Might Also Like

New Posts to Your Inbox!

Stay in touch

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.

Lateral flow immunoassay for small-molecules detection in phytoproducts: a review

• Open access
• Published: 16 February 2022
• Volume 76 , pages 521–545, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Poomraphie Nuntawong 1 ,
• Waraporn Putalun 2 , 4 ,
• Hiroyuki Tanaka 3 ,
• Satoshi Morimoto 1 &
• Seiichi Sakamoto   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6871-522X 1  

6190 Accesses

16 Citations

Explore all metrics

Phytoproducts are involved in various fields of industry. Small-molecule (Mw < 900 Da) organic compounds can be used to indicate the quality of plant samples in the perspective of efficacy by measuring the necessary secondary metabolites and in the perspective of safety by measuring the adulterant level of toxic compounds. The development of reliable detection methods for these compounds in such a complicated matrix is challenging. The lateral flow immunoassay (LFA) is one of the immunoassays well-known for its simplicity, portability, and rapidity. In this review, the general principle, components, format, and application of the LFA for phytoproducts are discussed.

Similar content being viewed by others

Development of Dual Quantitative Lateral Flow Immunoassay for the Detection of Mycotoxins

Chromogenic Platform-Based Lateral Flow Immunoassay

A gold nanoparticle-based lateral flow immunoassay for atrazine point-of-care detection using a handhold scanning device as reader

Tieqiang Sun, Zehua Xu, … Baoan Ning

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Phytoproducts are the substances, extracts, or compounds obtained from plants. They are in high demand in several industries, including medicine, cosmetics, and foods [ 1 ]. Plant secondary metabolites are an important part of phytoproducts [ 2 ]. The secondary metabolites of plants are generally small-molecule organic compounds (Mw < 900 Da) produced by plants but not directly involved in their growth and development [ 1 , 3 , 4 ]. The secondary metabolites are produced for long-term plant survival against herbivores, pests, pathogens, and the attraction of pollinators. The role of certain secondary metabolites remains unclear [ 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. These compounds have various biological functions, which can be applied in many fields [ 2 ]. The quality of phytoproducts is important, particularly when the plants are used in the field of medicine. The level of secondary metabolites is typically measured and used as a quality indicator for phytoproducts [ 6 , 7 ]. When plant-based products were used in a particular field, the adulterants and contaminants were highlighted as a global problem [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Certain products have been spiked with fungicides and/or phytoregulators for agricultural purposes [ 12 ]. The excessive intake of these adulterated and contaminated phytoproducts is harmful. Thus, a series of analytical techniques for small-molecules detection such as high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), gas chromatography (GC), GC-mass spectrometry detection (GC–MS), and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC–MS) have been developed. However, these methods require sophisticated equipment, skillful operators, and long operation times. Furthermore, these methods cannot be applied outside the laboratory.

The concept of using immunoassays for small-molecule detection was introduced to surmount these limitations. The assays are based on the specific binding of an antibody and antigen. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) relies on this basis. The benefits of this method are its cost-effectiveness, simplicity, and sufficient sensitivity, indicating that this immunological approach is useful for secondary metabolite detection [ 13 ]. Although the ELISA can solve the drawbacks of conventional chromatographic assays, the competitive ELISA is not suitable for certain scenarios and requires improvements. Generally, indirect competitive ELISA (icELISA) comprises five main steps, namely the antigen coating, nonspecific binding blocking, primary antibody reaction, enzyme-labeled antibody reaction, and enzymatic reaction. Hence, at least 4.5 h is required to complete the general icELISA [ 13 ]. Moreover, to read the signal from ELISA, microplate readers that correspond to the signal are required. Given these pitfalls in the current detection systems, the point-of-care test called a lateral flow immunoassay (LFA) was developed. Generally, macromolecules (proteins) or whole cells are the major analytes detected by immunoassays. These analytes can bind to the solid phase (i.e., microplate for ELISA and membrane for LFA) with few or without modification. Thus, non-competitive immunoassays are possible for detection. Moreover, their large and complex structure enables the generation of two different antibodies which recognize different epitopes on the same antigen with ease. This enables sandwich immunoassay format possible when macromolecules and whole cells are used as analytes. The competitive format also can be developed as an optional method for macromolecules and whole cell immunoassays. For small-molecules detection, the immunoassay format and design are slightly different. The competitive format is preferred over non-competitive format since the small molecules are unable to be immobilized directly on the solid phase. The general fabrication of LFA and its application in quality control for phytoproducts are discussed in this paper.

There is a wide application of point-of-care tests in environmental science, food, drug, and clinical analyses. “Ready to read” results are provided in a short time. The LFA or immunochromatographic strip test is a point-of-care device, which has been applied in qualitative, semi-quantitative, and quantitative analyses in versatile scenarios for six decades. The LFA is a simplified immunoassay, in which the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates are accumulated on the designated area of the membrane, which is filled with the antigen, and the result can be read-out within several minutes.

In 1956, the first nanoparticle application in immunoassays was initiated during Plotz and Singer’s so-called “latex fixation” test, in which the immunological approach was developed without using a paper-based device [ 14 ]. Thereafter, the radioimmunoassay (RIA) was developed by Yalow and Berson in 1959 [ 15 ], where a paraffin paper-based immunochromatographic device was developed to determine the insulin level in plasma. Afterward, the enzyme-based immunoassay was popularized as the replacement of the RIA in the 1960s [ 16 ]. The basic idea of immunoassays was continuously refined until the concept of using colloidal gold nanoparticle conjugates in an immunoassay was initiated in 1980 when the strategy called the sol-particle immunoassay was reported [ 17 ]. The usage of colloidal gold nanoparticles in immunoassays gained considerable attention in the 1980s because the well-known pregnancy test strip was commercially available and patented [ 18 ]. Eventually, the LFA was developed for determining antigens, antibodies, and amplification products of genes [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ] in several fields. This method is suitable as a point-of-care test, according to the World Health Organization using the criteria of ASSURED (affordable, sensitive, specific, user-friendly, robust, equipment-free, and deliverable) [ 23 ]. The criteria were recently revised as REASSURED (real-time connectivity, ease of specimen collection, affordable, sensitive, specific, user-friendly, rapid and robust, equipment-free and environmentally friendly, and deliverable to end-users) [ 24 ]. The system has been continuously refined and simplified, enabling non-skilled operators to perform the assay. Various commercially available strip tests for various antigens or antibodies have been launched [ 25 , 26 , 27 ]. Although the classical chromatography and ELISA methods offer high accuracy, the LFA is advantageous over them in scenarios where laboratory equipment is not available. Moreover, the assay time is extremely short. This renders the LFA a premium choice for sample screening.

Components of LFA

Generally, as demonstrated in Fig.  1 , the immunoassay is performed on a strip on which many types of materials are assembled. The main components of the strip are described in this section.

General components of the LFA and schematic description of each component of the immunochromatographic strip

Backing card

This is the part that provides strength to the whole system and enables ease of handling. It is typically fabricated with plastic polymers, such as polyvinyl chloride [ 28 , 29 ] and polystyrene [ 30 ]. Herein, the thickness of the backing card was in a wide range of 0.3–0.6 mm in the form of a piece of plastic sheet or a roll of plastic sheet. The commercially available backing card for LFA typically comes with an adhesive layer, which can be divided into four main areas for attaching the necessary components to the strip.

This is the component where the sample is applied to initiate the assay. The liquid is transferred through this component to other parts of the strip. The sample pad is typically made from cellulose [ 31 ], whereas certain minor pads are made from glass fiber [ 32 ]. The ideal sample pad continuously transfers the liquid at the designed flow rate. Hence, the homogeneity of the pore size is designed by the specific assay. For instance, samples that do not contain particle or prefiltered could use a homogeneous pore size sample pad, compared with samples that contain coarse materials, such as plant powders, preparations with insoluble ingredients, and whole-cell suspensions that prefer a nonhomogeneous pore size pad for the initial filter effect. When necessary, the sample pad is pretreated with a wetting agent, buffer, protein, or viscosity-enhancing agent. The aim of these pretreatments was mainly to control the flow rate, increase the retention time on the conjugate pad, and increase the reaction time at test and control zones.

Conjugate pad

Glass fiber is the famous material used for this component. Minor conjugate pads are made from polyester, cellulose, and other materials. It is the space where the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates are accumulated. The ideal conjugate pad should act as a bank of antibody–reporter molecule conjugates, which readily release once the liquid passes through and not permanently retain the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates. In certain LFA formats, this component is omitted, and the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates are directly added into the sample [ 33 , 34 ].

This is the area where the reaction of the antibody and antigen occurs. This membrane is typically made from nitrocellulose [ 35 ]. However, certain strip membranes are made of individually customized cellulose paper [ 36 ]. The pore size of the membrane highly affects the sensitivity of the LFA through the capillary flow rate. The reaction time of the antibody and immobilized antigen is high when the flow rate is low, offering a high chance of a reaction. Nevertheless, the experiment time (time until read-out) is equally high in such cases. Therefore, the membrane is chosen based on the balance between sensitivity and assay time. The ideal membrane exhibits low nonspecific adsorption. However, membrane blocking with low protein concentration (e.g., bovine serum albumin (BSA)) can be conducted when necessary. Before use, the membrane can be modified using a wetting agent and buffer to achieve the best condition for assays.

Adsorbent pad

This is the area to retain excess liquid in the system. The drainage of the excess liquid reduces the backflow of the sample and maintains an even flow rate in the system. Cellulose is typically used as a material for this pad.

The specificity and sensitivity are the important features of the LFA. The specificity is the antibody-related property. However, sensitivity could be affected by components of the LFA. The sensitivity of the test is related to the flow rate of the whole assay. Thus, the components that affect the flow rate of the test, i.e., sample pad and membrane play a role on sensitivity controlling. The flow rate of the whole assay could be controlled by the materials pore size, hydrophilicity of the materials, and pretreatment of the materials. Increasing/decreasing the flow rate for sensitivity adjustment is dependent on the format of the assay. For sandwich format, the flow rate needs to be slow enough to obtain the sufficient reaction time. In the competitive format, faster flow rate is not an obstruction for this LFA since the presence of an analyte is evaluated by the absence of the spot. However, the flow rate for competitive assay should be optimized to make the test zone visible in the non-analyte control strips. Even though sensitivity is the important factor of the assay, some LFAs require fast flow rate since the analysis time is also the point of concern as LFA is usually used as rapid test.

Manufacturing process of LFA

To date, the LFA applied for plant secondary metabolite is not available for mass-production. The mass-production of the LFA is generally applied for the medical diagnosis where the analytes are macromolecules. However, the manufacturing process of LFA is quite similar to the general one. The production of LFA generally initiated from preparation of necessary elements, assembling, cutting, and cassette assembling. The manufacturing process can be a batch-to-batch production or a continuously reel-to-reel production.

Membrane preparation

The test zone solution (hapten–carrier solution) and control zone solution (antibody against detection antibody) are accurately dispensed to the membrane using the appropriate dispenser, e.g., contact tip dispenser, noncontact pump-driven solenoid dispensers, and quantitative airbrush-type dispensers. The suitable dispenser is selected by the scale of the production. The reaction line-dispensed membrane is then dried using either in-line drying or batch oven drying. If necessary, the membrane is blocked by the appropriate solution using dipping tank and finally dried prior assemble. The membrane could be prepared with or without backing card in this step.

Conjugate pad preparation

The conjugate pad is pretreated (if necessary) with appropriate solution and dried prior to the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates dispensing. The conjugate could be dispensed by either dipping tank or the accurate dispenser. The finished conjugate pad is dried prior assembling.

Sample pad preparation

In some case, the LFA performance is enhanced by sample pad pretreatment. Thus, the sample pad is pretreated with optimized sample pad treatment solution and is then dried prior assemble.

Assembling or lamination

This is the process that membrane, conjugate pad, and sample pad are assembled into one-piece. Generally, semi-automated laminator is applied in this step in batch-to-batch production while in-line laminator which can laminate the treated elements after treatment is applied for reel-to-reel production.

Strip cutting

This is the process which the laminated sheet is cut into each strip. The size of the strip varies depending on the design of the strip test. The general cutters for this process are single rotary blade cutter, rotary card cutter, and guillotine cutter.

Cassette assembly

To increase the ease of handle for the strip, the strip is manually placed into the plastic housing. In some cases, the strip is cover with the soft plastic to enhance the strength of the strip and protect the reaction area against the mechanical force.

General principle of the LFA

Competitive format.

There is a simple rationale behind the LFA, as demonstrated in Fig.  2 . The major assays for small-molecule detection in phytoproducts are based on the competitive immunoassay. The assay commences when the liquid containing the analyte of interest flows through the strip after sample application. The sets of the strip can be provided with the cassette, which contains the sample loading opening that is connected to the sample pad and read-out opening [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ]. However, the cassette is not required in certain assays. Hence, the sample is applied either into the sample loading opening of the cassette or by directly dipping the sample pad of the strip into the sample solution. The liquid flows through the strip mainly by capillary force [ 44 ]. The direction of the flow is the origin of the assay name since the liquid flows laterally through the other compartment when the cassette is provided. In a case where the cassette is absent, the strip typically stands in the glass tube [ 33 ] or the microplate [ 34 ] where the sample solution or suspension is located. Therefore, the direction of the flow is antigravity. The high-solubility sample can be directly diluted in the buffer that builds up a suitable environment to interact with the detection system, whereas a moderate- to low-solubility sample can be dissolved using a low-concentration organic solvent as a cosolvent. The sample slowly migrates to the conjugate pad from the sample pad. This contains target-specific antibody–reporter molecule conjugates. In cases where the conjugate pad was omitted, the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates were mixed into the sample with an appropriate amount [ 33 , 34 , 45 , 46 , 47 ].When the liquid passes through the conjugates reservoir, the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates are slowly released. Few antibodies start to bind with the antigen and move together to the test zone. Test zone is normally filled with hapten–carrier conjugates. Under a high analyte concentration, most antibody–reporter molecule conjugates are filled with analytes in the antibody binding sites. Thus, the antibody is unable to bind the hapten–carrier conjugates leaving no spot on the strip. Conversely, there is space on the binding sites of antigen–reporter molecule conjugates, which can react with the antigen of immobilized hapten–carrier molecules under a low analyte of interest condition. The accumulation of the reporter molecules on that zone renders the spot visible by color development or fluorescence (depending on the type of reporter molecules). Afterward, the liquid passes through the last zone called the “control zone.” This zone is used to indicate the suitability of the system. It is normally immobilized by the antibody, which can react to the antibody–reporter molecule conjugates whether the binding sites are free or not. Thus, in this zone, a spot is always present under the immunochromatography-appropriate condition. The shape, color, and intensity of this zone indicate the abnormalities of the strip test system. The test and control zones can be designed in a band or spot-shape. However, the band-shape zones require special equipment to evenly transfer the designated solution onto the desired area [ 48 ]. The in-house reagent dispensing machine can be used with proper validation [ 48 , 49 , 50 ]. Dissimilar to the spot shape zones, simple biotechnology instruments, such as the pipette, can be used where access to the lateral flow dispenser is limited. The size and shape of the zones can be designed based on the function between the area of the zone and the concentration of antibody–reporter molecule conjugates. The small area of the zones required a minimal number of antibody–reporter molecule conjugates leading to high sensitivity. However, an extremely small area of the zones leads to the invisibility of the zones. Thus, the zone design should be optimized in the individual test. The excess liquid of the system is adsorbed in an adsorbent pad. The adsorption protects the unwanted backflow of the liquid in the strip. Generally, the band or spot with the intensity difference can be determined via visual observation. The appropriate reader or interpretation software is used for the intensity measurement in cases where thoroughly precise results are needed.

Competitive format of the strip test. The upper section demonstrates the symbolic representation of each compartment. The figure demonstrates the LFA signal in various analyte concentrations. There are two main types of detection zones, which are the spot and band types which demonstrated in the lower section

Multiplex competitive format

More than one analyte can be detected on an individual strip, as shown in Fig.  3 . The principle of this format is identical to the general competitive format. However, more than one antibody that corresponded to the number of analytes of interest are required in this system. The antibodies are individually embedded on the detection probe in the separated environment and applied in the same conjugate pads or test solution. In the general competitive format, there is only one test zone on the strip test, whereas the multiplex competitive format has more than one. The system incorporates the advantages from the multiple antibodies that render simultaneous detection possible in one analysis. The signal reporter elements can be the same (e.g., colloidal gold and colloidal gold) or different (e.g., colloidal gold and carbon nanoparticle) in one system. However, the selection of the nanoparticle for simultaneous detection presents many points of concern, particularly for compatibility among nanoparticles. The cross-reaction of the antibody is also a point of concern. The selected antibodies should not be bound to identical small compounds. This format can be extremely useful for controlling the quality of certain plants. The simultaneous detection system was first developed for the quality control of ginseng, in which the ginsenoside Rb1 and ginsenoside Rg1 (major biologically active compounds isolated from Panax ginseng ) were used as analytes [ 51 ]. A sensitive detection system has been developed, regardless of the structural similarity between these analytes. According to the Japanese pharmacopoeia 18th edition (JP18th), the qualified Panax ginseng required the appropriate amount of ginsenoside Rb1 and ginsenoside Rg1 at 0.20% and 0.10% (w/w dry weight), respectively [ 52 ]. Therefore, the benefit of the strip test for screening the raw material is highlighted and fits the pharmacopoeia criteria. Nowadays, identical principles are used for several analytes, and this method is called microarray detection [ 53 ]. However, this concept has never been applied to phytoproducts.

Multiplex competitive format of the strip test. The figure illustrates the multiplex competitive format designed for the simultaneous detection of two analytes. The upper right part demonstrates the symbolic representation of each compartment. The figure demonstrates the strip in various concentrations of analyte 1 and 2

Sandwich format

Apart from the competitive basis of immunochromatography, there is a sandwich immunochromatography format for small-molecule detection. Superior specificity is expected when the sandwich system is applied since the result appeared when two different antibodies recognized two different epitopes on the same antigen. The sandwich format of the LFA has generally been applied for a relatively large molecule, such as a microorganism cell [ 54 ] and protein [ 55 ]. This is because the sandwich system requires two distinct antibodies, which can bind to different epitopes. However, obtaining the appropriate pair of antibodies for secondary metabolites or an adulterant containing small molecules consumes several attempts and resources. This may be due to the steric hindrance blockage between the antigen–capture antibody and antigen–tag antibody [ 56 ]. In extremely small molecules, this format is practically impossible to develop because the epitope position was shorter than 5 Å (the chain length of 5 carbon atoms), which was supposed to exhibit a minute chance of success [ 57 ]. However, a study has successfully performed the LFA using this format with modifications, as demonstrated in Fig.  4 . The liquid flow of this format is identical to the competitive assay; however, the test zone was altered. The morphine-detectable LFA was developed by placing the anti-morphine fragmented antibody (FAb) on the test zone as a capture antibody [ 58 ]. When the morphine in the sample passed through the anti-morphine FAb, the morphine molecule was bound to the anti-morphine FAb generating the immunocomplex (FAb-morphine complex). The reporter molecule (gold nanoparticle) that conjugated with the anti-immunocomplex FAb was used as a detection antibody. When the immunoprobe passed through the immunocomplex on the membrane, the reporter molecules were accumulated, and the visible band was shown on the strip. The higher the morphine content in a sample, the higher the intensity of the visible band obtained, which was the opposite read-out style, compared with that of the competitive format. Although the system is specific, sensitive, and easy to interpret, the format is not quite famous as it has not been applied for another natural compound or plant product adulterant, as far as we know. This may be due to the complex steps of dual antibody preparation and the time-consuming preparation of two antibodies.

Sandwich format of the strip test. The upper section demonstrates the symbolic representation of each compartment. The figure demonstrates the LFA signal in various analyte concentrations. This figure was summarized from Teerinen et al. [ 58 ] where morphine was detected

Type of analysis in LFA

The LFA could be developed for qualitative, semi-quantitative, and quantitative analyses, up to the design of that individual study. Generally, LFA for phytoproducts is competitive format as mentioned in the previous section. Thus, type of analysis in LFA would discuss based on this format hereafter. Table 1 summarizes the detail of each type of analysis.

Qualitative analysis

This detects the presence or absence of the compound in the matrix; however, it cannot describe the concentration level of the compound. A positive result, absence of spot, in this assay type indicates that the analyte concentration is more than the limit of detection (LOD) of the system, whereas a negative result, presence of spot, indicates that the analyte concentration is lower than the LOD or that the compound is not present in the sample. Although the benefits of this analysis type are limited, most assays are developed for qualitative analysis because the result interpretation is simple and exhibits low variation among interpreters. Considering that the presence of spot is the result indicator, there is no requirement for special equipment or software for the interpretation. Moreover, the qualitative analysis is suitable for compound-rich and color-rich matrixes, such as plant extracts. Occasionally, the interference of the matrix leads to a malfunction of the antibody. Hence, defining the accurate amount of analyte is difficult because the intensity of the spot fluctuates from matrix to matrix. Additionally, the vivid or dark color of the extract could interfere with the results, when accurate intensity is required. However, the presence or absence of the spot can be easily justified.

Semi-quantitative analysis

This analysis provides the estimation of the concentration of an analyte in the form of levels. The results are usually categorized as the level of concentration of the analyte in a sample into high (+++), medium (++), low (+), and very low/absence (–) considering that the intensity of the spot is subjective. Thus, the intensity comparator is required to reduce the bias of the interpretation. To elucidate the interpretation, certain studies that applied the competitive format designated the absence of a spot as high concentration, a weak intensity spot as low concentration, and a strong intensity spot as an extremely low concentration or absence of analytes [ 34 ].

Quantitative analysis

Only few studies developed the LFA as a quantitative analysis tool because it requires more validation processes and special equipment for interpretation. The results obtained from this analysis are more detailed, and the exact amount of the analyte can be reported. The method validations to obtain a reliable standard curve are required besides the qualitative analysis validation methods.

Strengths and weaknesses of the LFA

The strengths and weaknesses of the LFA are described in Table 2 . The use of LFA for phytoproduct analysis provides various benefits over other detection methods. The main dominant point of the LFA is that it can be readily performed at the point of need because it is extremely portable. Most prepared strips require only an apply-and-interpret step. This reduces the need for skillful labor. The LFA generally requires a shorter time for one analysis when compared with the ELISA or conventional chromatographic methods. For certain systems, the liquid sample can be directly applied onto the strip without any sample pretreatment. Considering that the assay is based on the antibody and antigen reaction, a highly specific antibody can be used to obtain a highly analyte-specific assay. The already produced strip can be preserved and used when required under various conditions, even at room temperature [ 59 ]. The shelf life of the prepared strip is generally longer than that of the ELISA kit, which is usually prepared in liquid form. The strip can be easily scaled-up for a large batch production. The cost of all materials for one assay is reasonable. The signal can be simply interpreted by visual observation. Moreover, a signal reader is not required for the qualitative system. Thus, the reach ability of the assay is high, particularly in developing countries. The system is designed for single use. Thus, the possibility of contamination by a previous assay sample, which occurs in the conventional column chromatographic methods, is diminished. Moreover, the need for equipment sanitization is minimized. Compared with the conventional column chromatographic methods, this assay requires an extremely small amount of organic solvent, indicating that it is more environmentally friendly and safe for the user.

Although the LFA has various strengths, there are limitations. The specific antibody is the fundamental requirement of the assay, and the cost and labor for antibody production are relatively high. The nonspecific binding of the antibody occurs because of the cross-reaction profile of an antibody or by skipping the washing step in the LFA. The detection protocol generally does not involve washing the strip. The strip test is generally designed for “positive/negative” results. For the semi-quantitative and quantitative analyses, the intensity of the spot is difficult to achieve a subjective judgment. This limitation can be overcome with the use of a color intensity analytical software with input from membrane strip readers, scanners, or digital cameras. If a semi-quantitative analysis is required, the strips applied with gradient concentrations of the analyte are required for comparison. Dissimilar to the ELISA, this system generally has no signal amplifier, such as horseradish peroxidase. The system requires several molecules of the antibody–nanoparticle conjugates to provide a sufficient signal for reading. This results in lower sensitivity when compared with that of the ELISA.

Production of anti-hapten antibody

The unique structure glycoprotein called immunoglobulin (Ig) is the key component of the LFA as a detection tool. The antigen-specific antibody is secreted from the B-cell lymphocytes as a response of adaptive immune systems. The polyclonal antibody (pAb) and monoclonal antibody (mAb) are applied in LFA. However, mAb is the major type of antibody used for phytoproducts analysis LFA because its specificity and sensitivity are selectable, and the batch-to-batch quality of the antibody is controllable [ 60 ]. Regarding an avian-based antibody, the egg-derived polyclonal IgY antibody was applied in strip test fabrication [ 42 ]. The major isotype frequently applied in LFA is IgG because of its superior sensitivity, less cross-reactivity, and minimally complicated purification process, compared with another isotype. Figure  5 shows the summary of antibody production for LFA applied for phytoproducts.

Summary of antibody production for the LFA applied for phytoproducts. A Production of pAb. In the avian host, polyclonal IgY is typically produced from the immunization of the avian; the egg yolk containing polyclonal IgY is collected and purified, and the serum containing polyclonal IgG is collected in the bigger animal, e.g., rabbit. B Production of mAb through the hybridoma technique. The animal host (mouse), as shown in the figure, was sequentially immunized, and the spleen was collected for cell fusion. The selection process using hypoxanthine–aminopterin–thymidine (HAT) medium and limited dilution enabled the desired characteristic hybridoma to be expanded. The mAb was produced from the supernatant of the selected clone. FCA and FIA represent Freund’s complete adjuvant and Freund’s incomplete adjuvant, respectively. C Production of recombinant antibody using bacteria as a host. The gene encoding the antibody was fragmented and cloned into the bacteria. With the appropriate expression technique, the fragmented antibody, i.e., FAb or single-chain variable fragment was produced

The antibody production of macromolecules (Mw > 10,000 Da) is simple because the macromolecules frequently exhibit strong antigenicity. Plant secondary metabolites or contaminants are typically small-molecule compounds (Mw < 900 Da), which do not exhibit antigenicity. Therefore, various types of carriers have been used to enable these small molecules to exhibit antigenicity. Keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) and BSA are the carriers of choice in the production of anti-small-molecule antibodies because these proteins possess many functional groups, which can be easily conjugated with small-molecule compounds using few steps [ 61 , 62 ]. Moreover, these proteins are relatively large (KLH, 350 kDa; BSA, 66.5 kDa), compared with the small molecules. Thus, the immune system of the host animal can recognize, and the antibody can be successfully produced. The hybridoma formation is widely used when the production of mAb is required. There are three types of antibodies, which are predicted to be produced by the hybridoma, including the anti-carrier, anti-hapten–carrier complex, and anti-hapten antibodies. To sieve out the unwanted antibodies (anti-carrier and anti-hapten–carrier complex), the structurally different carrier conjugates, such as the human serum albumin (HSA), ovalbumin (OVA), mouse serum globulin, thyroglobulin, and diphtheria toxoid can be applied for antibody screening. The structurally different carrier conjugates can be used to develop the immunoassay when the antibody recognizes certain parts of the immunized molecules.

Recombinant antibody fragments are a group of antibodies that are not widely applied in the LFA because of their limited sensitivity and stability, compared with its parent antibody [ 63 ]. Moreover, the probability that the binding site of the antibody could bind to the detection probe was high because the molecules of these fragment antibodies were smaller. However, the ease of antibody production by Escherichia coli makes the recombinant antibody format attractive. Recently, a recombinant FAb was used as a single detection antibody to detect deoxymiroestrol, the potent phytoestrogen isolated from Pueraria candollei , in plant samples [ 64 ]. Noteworthily, the specificity and sensitivity profiles of this produced FAb were different from that of the original mAb [ 65 ]. The FAb tended to be more specific to one antigen rather than cross-reactive to structurally related compounds in this particular study. Therefore, the sensitive LFA of deoxymiroestrol was developed using these advantages.

Reporter for LFA

The labeling or reporter particle is the component that indicates the effectiveness and efficiency of the LFA. The antibody-directed particle accumulation generates a detectable signal on the membrane. There are various types of reporter particles applied in LFAs, such as colloidal gold nanoparticles, latex beads [ 66 ], carbon nanoparticles [ 67 , 68 , 69 ], composite nanoparticles [ 70 ], magnetic nanoparticles [ 71 ], liposomes [ 72 ], fluorescent probes [ 30 , 42 ], and enzymes [ 73 ]. However, LFA for phytoproducts shared a common reporter molecule (colloidal gold nanoparticles), whereas a few used quantum dots or carbon nanoparticles as reporters. Table 3 lists the nanoparticles usually applied in LFAs for phytoproducts.

Colloidal gold nanoparticles

This is the fluid or suspension form of the gold usually suspended in a water-based solution. The scarlet suspension is typically preferred over the blue or purple suspension as the particle size is less than 100 nm. The particle size of the nanoparticles can be selected according to the preference of the user. However, the oversize particles lead to the aggregation and sedimentation of the colloidal gold nanoparticles, whereas extremely small particles cause difficulty in the particle washing step and produce a meaningless color on the detection zones. The colloidal gold with a particle size exceeding 20 nm generated an interpretable signal [ 74 ]. Nevertheless, the appropriate particle size was proposed as approximately 40 nm because the maximum color was obtained at this size with the less steric hindrance of the antibody conjugation [ 74 ]. Colloidal gold is generally the first choice of material, owing to its various benefits. The labeling of the antibody to the colloidal gold can be performed by simple incubation. The antibody can bind to the colloidal gold particle through passive adsorption where the electrostatic force, hydrogen bonding, hydrophobicity, and Van der Waals forces are the main interactions [ 75 , 76 ]. Moreover, the direction of the antibody (position of constant and variable regions) on the colloidal gold nanoparticles is manageable with surface modification [ 77 ]. Compared with other materials, the colloidal gold nanoparticles are relatively inexpensive. The particles are stable in solution or dried form. Additionally, the important characteristic of the colloidal gold nanoparticles is their long-lasting color on the membranes. The colloidal gold can be easily synthesized using various methods, and the surface functional group can be synthesized by preference [ 78 , 79 ] and is easy to obtain through various commercial sources. When labeled with this nanoparticle, the assay results can be read-out on the basis of the colorimetric method. Nevertheless, the weaker signal intensity, compared with that of other nanoparticles is a point of concern. Generally, for the competitive immunoassay, the antibody concentration is important for the entire assay. The less the concentration of the antibody used in the system, the more sensitivity the developed system can be achieved. However, the colloidal gold nanoparticle–antibody conjugates concentration should be increased, when the signal is too weak to be interpreted. Moreover, false positives or negatives can occur in certain situations, such as environments with excess salt or extreme pH. The given color on the zones of the strip is pinkish red. It is not suitable to apply these nanoparticles in a test, where the sample is colored in the same tone, such as anthocyanin-, carotenoid-, and flavonoid-rich samples. Figure  6 A demonstrates an example of a signal obtained from these nanoparticles.

adopted from Nuntawong et al. [ 34 ]. B The signal obtained from the quantum dots. The upper section shows the signal of various analyte concentrations. The lower section shows the signal-reading machine and response curve of the signal. The picture was adopted from Qu et al. [ 37 ]. C Signal obtained from the carbon nanoparticle. The upper section shows the signal of various analyte concentrations. The lower section is the real sample application of the lateral flow immunoassay. The picture was adopted from Suárez-Pantaleón et al. [ 88 ]

Signals obtained from different nanoparticles. A Signal obtained from the colloidal gold nanoparticles. Visual observation was applied for analysis. The picture was

Quantum dots

These are semiconductor nanoparticles; their optoelectronic properties are dependent on their composition. Generally, the particle size of quantum dots is in a range of 1.5–10 nm [ 80 ]. They exhibit high colloidal stability. Moreover, the material has a low rate of photobleaching and high chemical stability. A few studies have used quantum dots to develop the LFA for phytoproducts [ 37 , 42 , 81 ]. This may be due to the high price of the materials. However, the high sensitivity assay was obtained as a trade-off for this drawback. Although the quantum dot-based LFA can provide a colorimetric read-out on the test zone, the visual observation is not usually used for final result analyses because of the sharp drop-off in the sensitivity. The fluorometric approach is typically used for such assay detections. Therefore, the user needs a specific strip reader to read the results. The antibody labeling can be easily conducted using simple carbodiimide-mediated methods or commercially recommended methods, depending on the functional group at the surface of the quantum dots and element of the antibody (Fv and Fc) preferred for conjugation. Compared with the organic dye labeling e.g., fluorescein and R-phycoerythrin, quantum dots exhibit superior photostability, high fluorescence, and broad adsorption spectra with specific emission wavelength [ 82 ]. Thus, quantum dots are useful as a good candidate for LFA development. They were first used to develop the LFA for the detection of puerarin (kakonein), the biologically active isoflavone isolated from the root of Pueraria lobata [ 37 ]. The system exhibited impressive sensitivity as the detection limit was 5.8 ng/mL, which was above the average sensitivity of other LFAs developed for phytoproducts until 2016. The production process of quantum dots and the material itself are usually toxic to the environment. Hence, proper waste management measures should be in place. Figure  6 B demonstrates an example of a signal obtained from these nanoparticles.

Carbon nanoparticles

These can be called colloidal carbon or carbon black. As they are intense-colored particles, the colorimetric method is usually used for read-out. The particles are easy to prepare for in-house use and are provided in various commercially available forms [ 83 , 84 ]. There are a few forms applied in LFAs, such as nanostrings [ 67 , 85 ] and nanotubes [ 86 ]. The carbon nanoparticles are extremely stable in various chromatographic environments. Moreover, their toxicity is relatively lower than that of quantum dots. The conjugation of the antibody to the probe is performed by simple incubation without any modification (physical adsorption) [ 67 ]. The results can be evaluated by visual observation because the black spot provides high contrast to the white color of the membrane [ 87 ]. These nanoparticles have been used in many fields for a decade. However, their application in plant sample detection is limited. Forchlorfenuron, the synthetic cytokinin usually spiked in agricultural products for regulating plant growth, was determined using carbon nanoparticles as an immunoprobe [ 88 ]. This LFA was developed to quantify the concentration of an analyte, which corresponded to the gray color measured using photo analysis software. The limit of quantification was 89 ng/L in an optimized buffer and 33.4 mg/kg in a kiwi and grape matrix. Although the carbon nanoparticles possess versatile benefits, black compounds and black matrixes should not be used on the strip developed by these nanoparticles. Figure  6 C demonstrates an example of a signal obtained from these nanoparticles.

Production of hapten–carrier molecules

Plant-derived compounds and contaminants are mostly small compounds. Small compounds are difficult to be immobilized to solid phase (well-plate and membrane) without pretreatment. Thus, hapten–carrier protein conjugates are generally used as an immobilizable antigen. There is no carrier of choice in LFAs for phytoproducts. The best carrier protein is selected on the basis of the experiment. The shape, size, and intensity of the band or spot in LFA per concentration unit are important factors. Small molecules can be conjugated with carriers with or without linkers. There are no solid rules in hapten–carrier design. Thus, an appropriate conjugation method for an individual hapten should be developed. Small molecules were routinely conjugated with carriers by simple chemical reactions (carbodiimide-mediated, sodium periodate, and Mannich reactions), as summarized in Table 4 . The selection of these reactions depends on the structure of the target molecule. Considering that the reactive aldehyde is easily formed at the vicinal diol of the sugar part, which readily reacts with the amine group of the protein carrier, the sodium periodate reaction is typically preferred in the conjugation of sugar-containing compounds [ 37 , 39 , 42 , 51 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 ]. However, the cross-reaction of the antibody against the aglycone of the glycosides should be considered when the antigen is prepared by this reaction. The compounds with carboxylic acid and hydroxyl functional groups are usually conjugated by a carbodiimide-mediated reaction [ 33 , 34 , 47 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 ], whereas compounds with active hydrogen, e.g., α-picolines, ketones, esters, and acetylenes, can be conjugated to an amine or amide group of the carrier by a Mannich reaction [ 103 , 104 ]. Furthermore, structure modifications of the parent compounds to add the reactive functional group to the molecule can be conducted when necessary.

LFA developed to detect secondary metabolites in plant samples

There are various important components in plants, such as proteins, polysaccharides, and small-molecule secondary metabolites. However, small-molecule secondary metabolites have gained attention because they were observed to be unique in particular plant species and had a high potential to be biologically active compounds. LFAs can be used on virtually all small-molecule secondary metabolites, such as triterpenoid glycoside, benzylisoquinoline alkaloid, and flavone glycoside, as listed in Table 5 . The main purpose of developing the assay is to inspect the quality of plants by investigating the amount of biologically active and toxic compounds in the plants. The concept of small-molecule detection by LFA was first introduced in 1996 when the analyte was progesterone (Mw = 314.46) [ 105 ]. The test zone was filled with an antiprogesterone antibody, and the detection probe was gold-labeled progesterone–OVA conjugates [ 105 ]. The strip functioned on a competitive basis, as mentioned in the “general principle of the LFA” section; however, the position of the main components (antibody and hapten–carrier protein conjugates) was switched. On the basis of this concept, the first LFA for ginsenosides Rb1 and Rg1 was invented [ 51 ]. Interestingly, no significant matrix effect that can alter the results was observed in this study, although the plant sample was extracted with an organic solvent and simply diluted before use. This advantage was observed in other studies and might be due to the affinity of the antibody to the antigen. Generally, the antibody can detect target compounds within the ng/mL to µg/mL level when it is applied to LFA. Therefore, it is not necessary to use a high-concentration sample. This ensures that the sample impurities that might interfere with the detection result (if any) are at a minimal level by simple dilution. Table 6 summarizes the plant secondary metabolite detection by the LFA.

Selectivity of the system

The selectivity of the LFA is an important factor that validates LFA results. The benefit of an antibody-based assay over the chromatographic-based assay is the selectivity. The molecular-level structure recognition of the antibody–antigen reaction is theoretically more selective than the conventional detectors, such as UV–Vis or fluorescent detectors. However, the cross-reactivity of the antibody against small molecules should be investigated. Considering that the matrix of the sample is usually the organic solvent extract of the plant of interest, there is a high chance that structurally similar compounds originating from the mutual biosynthesis pathway are present in the matrix. Furthermore, the glucoside form (aglycone target) or aglycone form (glycoside target) of the target compounds should be considered. The antibody that exhibits the cross-reaction might be useful when the cross-reacted compound is not present in the plant [ 34 ]. In certain cases, the broad cross-reaction of the antibody is useful when the class detection or total amount of the analyte and its cross-reacted compounds is desired [ 93 ]. Most antibodies applied in the LFA are well-characterized using icELISA before use. However, the cross-reactivity of the LFA system has been revised to ensure selectivity after conjugation with reporter molecules. Interestingly, the cross-reaction profiles obtained from LFAs correlate with the icELISA result in most LFAs applied for plant samples. This indicates that the cross-reaction profile of the antibodies is usually not altered by nanoparticle conjugation at least in LFAs applied for plant samples. The cross-reaction test is simply performed by challenging the developed LFA with cross-reaction compound candidates at a certain concentration. In certain cases, the percentage of cross-reaction (%CR) can be reported using the relative proportion of the LOD of the target compound and that of the candidates [ 33 ].

Additionally, the selection of the antibody type is important. Both pAb and mAb are applied in LFA. Similar to other antibody-based assays, pAb, which normally recognizes multiple epitopes, theoretically exhibit lower selectivity compared with mAb, which recognizes a single epitope and desired characteristics are precisely refined [ 13 ]. Hence, the antibody of choice for LFA is the mAb. Nevertheless, there are exceptions in certain haptens. For puerarin, pAb [ 94 ], and mAb [ 37 ] were applied in LFA and exhibited similar cross-reactivity profiles.

Sensitivity of the system

For LFA, the sensitivity indicates the usefulness of the system. Generally, the strip test is suitable for screening purposes. Hence, the sensitivity does not need to be as high as the confirmation analysis. However, optimization to obtain the highest sensitivity is recommended. The sensitivity of the LFA applied for plant samples is usually described as the LOD of the developed system. As mentioned in Table 7 , the LOD of the LFA is usually higher than that of the ELISA-based method. Nevertheless, the sensitivity remains comparable or superior to the conventional chromatographic method in a few cases.

LFA developed to detect the chemical contaminants

The presence of unnatural contaminants in plants is a point of concern for consumers. There are various compounds spiked into crops for agricultural purposes. Herbicides and insecticides are used in the large-scale production of plants to control weeds and pests, thereby preserving the yield. Occasionally, the use of fungicides is necessary to combat fungal microorganisms to preserve the yield, shelf life, and quality of plants [ 12 ]. Phytoregulators are necessary for controlling the growth rate and growth stages (flowering and fruiting) of crops. Although these chemicals are necessary for agricultural purposes, the high intake of these chemicals can be harmful to consumers. Thus, a limited level of these compounds is set to ensure safe consumption. Several studies have attempted to promptly detect chemical contaminants in phytoproducts, as summarized in Table 8 . Samples containing contaminants can be extracted by simple organic solvent extraction. The detection method is based on the competitive format. Noteworthily, the major developed strip tests for chemical contaminants are highly sensitive (several ng/mL for LOD) to meet the limit of contaminants in plant samples.

Phytoproducts are important for various industries. The small molecules in these products were highlighted because they are a quality indicator for phytoproducts. Reliable methods for controlling plant quality through qualitative and quantitative analyses of plant secondary metabolites and contaminants have been developed. Herein, LFA was discussed in the perspective of components, fabrication, and formats that apply in a complex matrix, such as a plant sample. Although the sensitivity of the LFA method is incomparable with that of the ELISA-based method or new-generation chromatographic methods, it is a representative analytical method suitable for the rapid screening of plant samples. The cost-effectiveness, selectivity, and simplicity of this method are exceptional. However, the main developmental obstacle is the specific antibody production for a particular antigen because the selectivity cannot be improved once a system is developed. There is room for studies to investigate sensitivity using the enzyme-based LFA or fluorescent probe, as this could cause a big leap in improvement. Furthermore, the scarcity of colloidal gold nanoparticles during the pandemic could lead to a stock shortage. The invention of ecofriendly alternative nanoparticles that exhibit identical or superior sensitivity is challenging. Thus, studies on LFAs for phytoproduct analysis remain evergreen.

Tiwari R, Rana CS (2015) Plant secondary metabolites: a review. Int J Eng Res Gen Sci 3:661–670

Google Scholar  

Chiocchio I, Mandrone M, Tomasi P, Marincich L, Poli F (2021) Plant secondary metabolites: an opportunity for circular economy. Molecules 26:495

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Fürstenberg-Hägg J, Zagrobelny M, Bak S (2013) Plant defense against insect herbivores. Int J Mol Sci 14:10242–10297

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Bennett RN, Wallsgrove RM (1994) Secondary metabolites in plant defence mechanisms. New Phytol 127:617–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1994.tb02968.x

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Demain AL, Fang A (2000) The natural functions of secondary metabolites. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 69:1–39

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Liu C, Cheng Y, Guo D, Zhang T, Li Y, Hou W, Huang L, Xu H (2017) A new concept on quality marker for quality assessment and process control of Chinese medicines. Chin Herb Med 9:3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1674-6384(17)60070-4

Article   Google Scholar  

World Health Organization (2009) Forty-third report of the WHO expert committee on specifications for pharmaceutical formulations

Ernst E (2002) Toxic heavy metals and undeclared drugs in Asian herbal medicines. Trends Pharmacol Sci 23:136–139

Ching CK, Lam YH, Chan AYW, Mak TWL (2012) Adulteration of herbal antidiabetic products with undeclared pharmaceuticals: a case series in Hong Kong. Br J Clin Pharmacol 73:795–800. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2011.04135.x

Ching CK, Chen SPL, Lee HHC, Lam YH, Ng SW, Chen ML, Tang MHY, Chan SSS, Ng CWY, Cheung JWL, Chan TYC, Lau NKC, Chong YK, Mak TWL (2018) Adulteration of proprietary Chinese medicines and health products with undeclared drugs: experience of a tertiary toxicology laboratory in Hong Kong. Br J Clin Pharmacol 84:172–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.13420

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ernst E (2002) Adulteration of Chinese herbal medicines with synthetic drugs: a systematic review. J Intern Med 252:107–113

Zubrod JP, Bundschuh M, Arts G, Brühl CA, Imfeld G, Knäbel A, Payraudeau S, Rasmussen JJ, Rohr J, Scharmüller A, Smalling K, Stehle S, Schulz R, Schäfer RB (2019) Fungicides: an overlooked pesticide class? Environ Sci Technol 53:3347–3365. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b04392

Sakamoto S, Putalun W, Vimolmangkang S, Phoolcharoen W, Shoyama Y, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2018) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the quantitative/qualitative analysis of plant secondary metabolites. J Nat Med 72:32–42

Singer JM, Plotz CM (1956) The latex fixation test: I. Application to the serologic diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. Am J Med 21:888–892. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9343(56)90103-6

Yalow RS, Berson SA (1960) Immunoassay of endogenous plasma insulin in man. J Clin Invest 39:1157–1175. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI104130

Avrameas S (1969) Coupling of enzymes to proteins with glutaraldehyde. Use of the conjugates for the detection of antigens and antibodies. Immunochemistry 6:43–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0019-2791(69)90177-3

Leuvering JHW, Thai PJHM, Van der Waart MV, Schuurs AHWM (1980) Sol particle immunoassay (spia). J Immunoassay 1:77–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/01971528008055777

O’Farrell B (2009) Evolution in lateral flow-based immunoassay systems. In: Lateral flow immunoassay, pp 1–33

Chen Y, Wang Y, Xiao M, Wei S, Yang H, Yin R (2021) Polymerase chain reaction with lateral flow sensor assay for the identification of horse meat in raw and processed meat products. Food Chem. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128840

Velasco A, Ramilo-Fernández G, Denis F, Oliveira L, Shum P, Silva H, Sotelo CG (2021) A new rapid method for the authentication of common octopus ( Octopus vulgaris ) in seafood products using recombinase polymerase amplification (rpa) and lateral flow assay (lfa). Foods 10:1825

Banger S, Pal V, Tripathi NK, Goel AK (2021) Development of a PCR lateral flow assay for rapid detection of Bacillus anthracis , the causative agent of anthrax. Mol Biotechnol 63:702–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12033-021-00335-6

Jauset-Rubio M, Svobodová M, Mairal T, McNeil C, Keegan N, Saeed A, Abbas MN, El-Shahawi MS, Bashammakh AS, Alyoubi AO, O’Sullivan CK (2016) Ultrasensitive, rapid and inexpensive detection of DNA using paper based lateral flow assay. Sci Rep 6:37732. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep37732

Kettler H, White K, Hawkes S (2004) Mapping the landscape of diagnostics for sexually transmitted infections: key findings and recommandations. Unicef/Undp/World Bank/Who 1–44

Land KJ, Boeras DI, Chen XS, Ramsay AR, Peeling RW (2019) REASSURED diagnostics to inform disease control strategies, strengthen health systems and improve patient outcomes. Nat Microbiol 4:46–54

Serrano MM, Rodríguez DN, Palop NT, Arenas RO, Córdoba MM, Mochón MDO, Cardona CG (2020) Comparison of commercial lateral flow immunoassays and ELISA for SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection. J Clin Virol 129:104529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104529

Courtney RC, Taylor SL, Baumert JL (2016) Evaluation of commercial milk-specific lateral flow devices. J Food Prot 79:1767–1774. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-16-127

Myers MJ, Yancy HF, Farrell DE, Washington JD, Frobish RA (2005) Evaluation of two commercial lateral-flow test kits for detection of animal proteins in animal feed. J Food Prot 68:2656–2664. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-68.12.2656

Li Y, Xie H, Wang J, Li X, Xiao Z, Xu Z, Lei H, Shen X (2021) Lateral flow immunochromatography assay for detection of furosemide in slimming health foods. Foods 10:2041. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10092041

Li S, Wu X, Kuang H, Liu L (2020) Development of an ic-ELISA and an immunochromatographic strip assay for the detection of aconitine. Food Agric Immunol 31:243–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540105.2020.1714555

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ryu JH, Kwon M, Moon JD, Hwang MW, Lee JM, Park KH, Yun SJ, Bae HJ, Choi A, Lee H, Jung B, Jeong J, Han K, Kim Y, Oh EJ (2018) Development of a rapid automated fluorescent lateral flow immunoassay to detect Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), antibody to HBsAg, and antibody to Hepatitis C. Ann Lab Med 38:578–584. https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2018.38.6.578

Alam N, Tong L, He Z, Tang R, Ahsan L, Ni Y (2021) Improving the sensitivity of cellulose fiber-based lateral flow assay by incorporating a water-dissolvable polyvinyl alcohol dam. Cellulose 28:8641–8651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-04083-3

Tsai TT, Huang TH, Chen CA, Ho NYJ, Chou YJ, Chen CF (2018) Development a stacking pad design for enhancing the sensitivity of lateral flow immunoassay. Sci Rep 8:17319. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-35694-9

Yusakul G, Sakamoto S, Chanpokapaiboon K, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2019) Preincubation format for a sensitive immunochromatographic assay for monocrotaline, a toxic pyrrolizidine alkaloid. Phytochem Anal 30:653–660. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.2838

Nuntawong P, Ochi A, Chaingam J, Tanaka H, Sakamoto S, Morimoto S (2021) The colloidal gold nanoparticle-based lateral flow immunoassay for fast and simple detection of plant-derived doping agent, higenamine. Drug Test Anal 13:762–769. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.2981

Mansfield MA (2007) The use of nitrocellulose membranes in lateral-flow assays. In: Drugs of abuse, pp 71–85

Zeng Y, Liang D, Zheng P, Zhang Y, Wang Z, Mari GM, Jiang H (2021) A simple and rapid immunochromatography test based on readily available filter paper modified with chitosan to screen for 13 sulfonamides in milk. J Dairy Sci 104:126–133. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-18987

Qu H, Zhang Y, Qu B, Kong H, Qin G, Liu S, Cheng J, Wang Q, Zhao Y (2016) Rapid lateral-flow immunoassay for the quantum dot-based detection of puerarin. Biosens Bioelectron 81:358–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.03.008

Duan Y, Luo J, Liu C, Shan L, Dou X, Yang S, Yang M (2019) Rapid identification of triptolide in Tripterygium wilfordii products by gold immunochromatographic assay. J Pharm Biomed Anal 168:102–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2019.02.020

Zhang Y, Xiao W, Kong H, Cheng J, Yan X, Zhang M, Wang Q, Qu H, Zhao Y (2018) A highly sensitive immunochromatographic strip test for rapid and quantitative detection of saikosaponin d. Molecules 23:338. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules23020338

Article   CAS   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Qu H, Qu B, Cheng J, Zhang Y, Zeng W, Wang Q, Kong H, Zhao Y (2018) Development of a one-step lateral flow immunoassay for rapid detection of icariin. Curr Pharm Anal 14:101–107. https://doi.org/10.2174/1573412913666161214125948

Zhang B, Nan TG, Xin J, Zhan ZL, Kang LP, Yuan Y, Wang BM, Huang LQ (2019) Development of a colloidal gold-based lateral flow dipstick immunoassay for rapid detection of chlorogenic acid and luteoloside in Flos Lonicerae Japonicae. J Pharm Biomed Anal 170:83–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2019.03.035

Zhang Y, Kong H, Liu X, Cheng J, Zhang M, Wang Y, Lu F, Qu H, Zhao Y (2018) Quantum dot-based lateral-flow immunoassay for rapid detection of rhein using specific egg yolk antibodies. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol 46:1685–1693. https://doi.org/10.1080/21691401.2017.1389749

Li S, Zhu J, Ma W, Kuang H, Liu L, Xu C (2021) Development of a lateral-flow ICA strip for the detection of colchicine. Anal Methods 13:3092–3100. https://doi.org/10.1039/d1ay00804h

Lee D, Ozkaya-Ahmadov T, Chu CH, Boya M, Liu R, Fatih Sarioglu A (2021) Capillary flow control in lateral flow assays via delaminating timers. Sci Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abf9833

Sakamoto S, Yusakul G, Nuntawong P, Kitisripanya T, Putalun W, Miyamoto T, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2017) Development of an indirect competitive immunochromatographic strip test for rapid detection and determination of anticancer drug, harringtonine. J Chromatogr B Anal Technol Biomed Life Sci 1048:150–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.01.032

Nuntawong P, Lohseethong K, Juengwatanatrakul T, Yusakul G, Putalun W, Tanaka H, Sakamoto S, Morimoto S (2021) Competitive immunochromatographic test strips for the rapid semi-quantitative analysis of the biologically active bitter glycoside, amarogentin. J Immunoass Immunochem 42:48–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/15321819.2020.1819308

Li S, Wu X, Song S, Zheng Q, Kuang H (2019) Development of ic-ELISA and an immunochromatographic strip assay for the detection of aristolochic acid I. Food Agric Immunol 30:140–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540105.2018.1551331

Han W, Shin JH (2021) Low-cost, open-source 3D printed antibody dispenser for development and small-scale production of lateral flow assay strips. HardwareX. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ohx.2021.e00188

Choi S, Lee JH, Choi JS, Il JH (2015) Economical and rapid manufacturing of lateral flow immunosensor using fountain pens and gold colloidal solution. Anal Methods 7:1834–1842. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4ay02940b

Credou J, Faddoul R, Berthelot T (2015) Photo-assisted inkjet printing of antibodies onto cellulose for the eco2-friendly preparation of immunoassay membranes. RSC Adv 5:29786–29798. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5ra03442f

Putalun W, Fukuda N, Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (2004) A one-step immunochromatographic assay for detecting ginsenosides Rb1 and Rg1. Anal Bioanal Chem 378:1338–1341

GINSENG RADIX RUBRA. Japanese Pharmacopoeia 18th Edition (JP18th), 1923–1925. https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/11120000/000788459.pdf

Taranova NA, Byzova NA, Zaiko VV, Starovoitova TA, Vengerov YY, Zherdev AV, Dzantiev BB (2013) Integration of lateral flow and microarray technologies for multiplex immunoassay: application to the determination of drugs of abuse. Microchim Acta 180:1165–1172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-013-1043-2

Wang C, Peng J, Liu DF, Xing KY, Zhang GG, Huang Z, Cheng S, Zhu FF, Duan ML, Zhang KY, Yuan MF, Lai WH (2018) Lateral flow immunoassay integrated with competitive and sandwich models for the detection of aflatoxin M1 and Escherichia coli O157:H7 in milk. J Dairy Sci 101:8767–8777. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-14655

Ren YG, Liu MC, Ji MZ, Chen C, Hu HZ, Wang ZX, Yu PQ, Shang JM, Zhou QW, Tao NY, Guo YF, Lu YJ, Wang ZZ (2021) Rapid detection of human heart-type fatty acid-binding protein in human plasma and blood using a colloidal gold-based lateral flow immunoassay. Exp Ther Med 22:1238. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2021.10673

Jeffrey PD, Schildbach JF, Chang CYY, Kussie PH, Margolies MN, Sheriff S (1995) Structure and specificity of the anti-digoxinantibody 40–50. J Mol Biol 248:344–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2836(95)80055-7

Quinton J, Charruault L, Nevers MC, Volland H, Dognon JP, Crémlnon C, Taran F (2010) Toward the limits of sandwich immunoassay of very low molecular weight molecules. Anal Chem 82:2536–2540. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac100058f

Teerinen T, Lappalainen T, Erho T (2014) A paper-based lateral flow assay for morphine. Anal Bioanal Chem 406:5955–5965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-014-8001-7

Bever CS, Adams CA, Hnasko RM, Cheng LW, Stanker LH (2020) Lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) for the detection of lethal amatoxins from mushrooms. PLoS ONE 15:e0231781. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231781

Parray HA, Shukla S, Samal S, Shrivastava T, Ahmed S, Sharma C, Kumar R (2020) Hybridoma technology a versatile method for isolation of monoclonal antibodies, its applicability across species, limitations, advancement and future perspectives. Int Immunopharmacol 85:106–639

Greenfield EA, DeCaprio J, Brahmandam M (2018) Making weak antigens strong: Cross-linking peptides to klh with maleimide. Cold Spring Harb Protoc 2018:810–811. https://doi.org/10.1101/pdb.prot100016

Li B, Yuan Z, Hung HC, Ma J, Jain P, Tsao C, Xie J, Zhang P, Lin X, Wu K, Jiang S (2018) Revealing the immunogenic risk of polymers. Angew Chemie - Int Ed 57:13873–13876. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201808615

Kang TH, Seong BL (2020) Solubility, stability, and avidity of recombinant antibody fragments expressed in microorganisms. Front Microbiol 11:1927

Sae-Foo W, Krittanai S, Juengsanguanpornsuk W, Yusakul G, Sakamoto S, Putalun W (2021) Fragment antigen-binding (Fab) antibody-based lateral flow immunoassay for rapid and sensitive detection of potent phytoestrogen, deoxymiroestrol. J Nat Med 75:1043–1049

Krittanai S, Putalun W, Sakamoto S, Tanaka H, Juengwatanatrakul T, Yusakul G (2020) Expression of actively soluble antigen-binding fragment (Fab) antibody and GFP fused Fab in the cytoplasm of the engineered Escherichia coli . Mol Biol Rep 47:4519–4529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-020-05502-7

Li X, Chen X, Liu Z, Wang J, Hua Q, Liang J, Shen X, Xu Z, Lei H, Sun Y (2021) Latex microsphere immunochromatography for quantitative detection of dexamethasone in milk and pork. Food Chem 345:128607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128607

Wiriyachaiporn N, Sirikett H, Maneeprakorn W, Dharakul T (2017) Carbon nanotag based visual detection of influenza A virus by a lateral flow immunoassay. Microchim Acta 184:1827–1835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-017-2191-6

Zhang X, Zhao F, Sun Y, Mi T, Wang L, Li Q, Li J, Ma W, Liu W, Zuo J, Chu X, Chen B, Han W, Mao Y (2020) Development of a highly sensitive lateral flow immunoassay based on receptor-antibody-amorphous carbon nanoparticles to detect 22 β-lactams in milk. Sensors Actuators B Chem 321:128458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2020.128458

Noguera P, Posthuma-Trumpie GA, Van Tuil M, Van Der Wal FJ, De Boer A, Moers APHA, Van Amerongen A (2011) Carbon nanoparticles in lateral flow methods to detect genes encoding virulence factors of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli . Anal Bioanal Chem 399:831–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-010-4334-z

Bai Y, Tian C, Wei X, Wang Y, Wang D, Shi X (2012) A sensitive lateral flow test strip based on silica nanoparticle/CdTe quantum dot composite reporter probes. RSC Adv 2:1778–1781. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2ra00976e

Liu F, Zhang H, Wu Z, Dong H, Zhou L, Yang D, Ge Y, Jia C, Liu H, Jin Q, Zhao J, Zhang Q, Mao H (2016) Highly sensitive and selective lateral flow immunoassay based on magnetic nanoparticles for quantitative detection of carcinoembryonic antigen. Talanta 161:205–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2016.08.048

Wen HW, Borejsza-Wysocki W, Decory TR, Durst RA (2005) Development of a competitive liposome-based lateral flow assay for the rapid detection of the allergenic peanut protein Ara h1. Anal Bioanal Chem 382:1217–1226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-005-3292-3

Calabria D, Calabretta MM, Zangheri M, Marchegiani E, Trozzi I, Guardigli M, Michelini E, Di Nardo F, Anfossi L, Baggiani C, Mirasoli M (2021) Recent advancements in enzyme-based lateral flow immunoassays. Sensors 21:3358

Christopher P, Robinson N, Shaw MK (2007) Antibody-label conjugates in lateral-flow assays. Drugs of abuse, pp 87–98

Haynes CA, Norde W (1994) Globular proteins at solid/liquid interfaces. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2:517–566

Norde W (1996) Driving forces for protein adsorption at solid surfaces. Macromol Symp 103:5–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/masy.19961030104

Zhang L, Mazouzi Y, Salmain M, Liedberg B, Boujday S (2020) Antibody-gold nanoparticle bioconjugates for biosensors: synthesis, characterization and selected applications. Biosens Bioelectron 165:112–370

Cvak B, Pum D, Molinelli A, Krska R (2012) Synthesis and characterization of colloidal gold particles as labels for antibodies as used in lateral flow devices. Analyst 137:1882–1887. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2an16108g

Makhsin SR, Razak KA, Noordin R, Zakaria ND, Chun TS (2012) The effects of size and synthesis methods of gold nanoparticle-conjugated MαHIgG4 for use in an immunochromatographic strip test to detect brugian filariasis. Nanotechnology 23:495719. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/23/49/495719

Maxwell T, Nogueira Campos MG, Smith S, Doomra M, Thwin Z, Santra S (2019) Quantum dots. Nanoparticles for biomedical applications: fundamental concepts, biological interactions and clinical applications, pp 243–265

Wang Y, Xu J, Qiu Y, Li P, Liu B, Yang L, Barnych B, Hammock BD, Zhang C (2019) Highly specific monoclonal antibody and sensitive quantum dot beads-based fluorescence immunochromatographic test strip for tebuconazole assay in agricultural products. J Agric Food Chem 67:9096–9103. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.9b02832

Resch-Genger U, Grabolle M, Cavaliere-Jaricot S, Nitschke R, Nann T (2008) Quantum dots versus organic dyes as fluorescent labels. Nat Methods 5:763–775

Kaviani D (2015) Synthesis of carbon nanoparticles from polystyrene wastes. Int J Sci 1:53–57. https://doi.org/10.18483/ijsci.797

Muhsan MS, Nadeem S, Hassan AU, Din AMU, Shahid S, Ali S (2019) Synthesis of carbon nanoparticles by using seed oils. Pakistan J Sci Ind Res Ser A Phys Sci 62:1–7. https://doi.org/10.52763/PJSIR.PHYS.SCI.62.1.2019.1.7

Kalogianni DP, Boutsika LM, Kouremenou PG, Christopoulos TK, Ioannou PC (2011) Carbon nano-strings as reporters in lateral flow devices for DNA sensing by hybridization. Anal Bioanal Chem 400:1145–1152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-011-4845-2

Qiu W, Baryeh K, Takalkar S, Chen W, Liu G (2019) Carbon nanotube-based lateral flow immunoassay for ultrasensitive detection of proteins: application to the determination of IgG. Microchim Acta 186:436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-019-3508-4

Posthuma-Trumpie GA, Wichers JH, Koets M, Berendsen LBJM, Van Amerongen A (2012) Amorphous carbon nanoparticles: a versatile label for rapid diagnostic (immuno)assays. Anal Bioanal Chem 402:593–600

Suárez-Pantaleón C, Wichers J, Abad-Somovilla A, Van Amerongen A, Abad-Fuentes A (2013) Development of an immunochromatographic assay based on carbon nanoparticles for the determination of the phytoregulator forchlorfenuron. Biosens Bioelectron 42:170–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2012.11.001

Putalun W, Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (2005) Rapid detection of glycyrrhizin by immunochromatograhic assay. Phytochem Anal 16:370–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.862

Imsungnoen N, Phrompittayarat W, Ingkaninan K, Tanaka H, Putalun W (2009) Immunochromatographic assay for the detection of pseudojujubogenin glycosides. Phytochem Anal 20:64–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.1098

Sritularak B, Juengwatanatrakul T, Putalun W, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2012) A rapid one-step immunochromatographic assay for the detection of asiaticoside. J Nat Med 66:279–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-011-0582-2

Inyai C, Komaikul J, Kitisripanya T, Tanaka H, Sritularak B, Putalun W (2015) Development of a rapid immunochromatographic strip test for the detection of mulberroside A. Phytochem Anal 26:423–427. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.2576

Sakamoto S, Yusakul G, Pongkitwitoon B, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2016) Colloidal gold-based indirect competitive immunochromatographic assay for rapid detection of bioactive isoflavone glycosides daidzin and genistin in soy products. Food Chem 194:191–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.08.002

Krittanai S, Kitisripanya T, Udomsin O, Tanaka H, Sakamoto S, Juengwatanatrakul T, Putalun W (2018) Development of a colloidal gold nanoparticle-based immunochromatographic strip for the one-step detection of miroestrol and puerarin. Biomed Chromatogr 32:e4330. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmc.4330

Sakamoto S, Wada S, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2018) Sensitive quantitative analysis of the bitter glycoside amarogentin by specific monoclonal antibody-based indirect competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RSC Adv 8:17410–17416. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8ra02922a

Putalun W, Morinaga O, Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (2004) Development of a one-step immunochromatographic strip test for the detection of sennosides A and B. Phytochem Anal 15:112–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.752

Zhao J, He SP, Liu W, Deng AX, Nan TG, Wang BM, Zhai ZX, Li ZH (2006) Development of a lateral flow dipstick immunoassay for the rapid detection of glycyrrhizic acid. Food Agric Immunol 17:173–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540100601072875

Paudel MK, Putalun W, Sritularak B, Morinaga O, Shoyama Y, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2011) Development of a combined technique using a rapid one-step immunochromatographic assay and indirect competitive ELISA for the rapid detection of baicalin. Anal Chim Acta 701:189–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2011.05.054

Limsuwanchote S, Putalun W, Tanaka H, Morimoto S, Keawpradub N, Wungsintaweekul J (2018) Development of an immunochromatographic strip incorporating anti-mitragynine monoclonal antibody conjugated to colloidal gold for Kratom alkaloids detection. Drug Test Anal 10:1168–1175. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.2354

Paudel MK, Shirota O, Sakamoto S, Morimoto S, Tanaka H (2017) An immunochromatographic assay for rapid etection of salvinorin A. J Immunoass Immunochem 38:438–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/15321819.2017.1324797

Smith LC, Lin L, Hwang CS, Zhou B, Kubitz DM, Wang H, Janda KD (2019) Lateral flow assessment and unanticipated toxicity of Kratom. Chem Res Toxicol 32:113–121. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00218

Phaisan S, Yusakul G, Nuntawong P, Sakamoto S, Putalun W, Morimoto S, Tanaka H (2021) Immunochromatographic assay for the detection of kwakhurin and its application for the identification of Pueraria candollei var. mirifica (Airy Shaw & Suvat.) Niyomdham. Phytochem Anal 32:503–511. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.2998

Kitisripanya T, Inyai C, Komaikul J, Krittanai S, Juengwatanatrakul T, Sakamoto S, Tanaka H, Morimoto S, Putalun W (2017) A lateral flow colloidal gold-based immunoassay for rapid detection of miroestrol in samples of White Kwao Krua, a phytoestrogen-rich plant. J Nat Med 71:659–664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-017-1096-3

Chaingam J, Kitisripanya T, Krittanai S, Sakamoto S, Tanaka H, Putalun W (2019) Development of a simple and rapid method for the detection of isomiroestrol in Pueraria candollei by an immunochromatographic strip test. J Nat Med 73:577–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-019-01307-6

Laitinen MPA, Vuento M (1996) Immunochromatographic assay for quantitation of milk progesterone. Acta Chem Scand 50:141–145. https://doi.org/10.3891/acta.chem.scand.50-0141

Nan TG, Cao Z, He LS, Yuan Y, Huang LQ, Wang BM (2013) Development of a lateral flow dipstick immunoassay for rapid detection of ginsenoside Re. Zhongguo Zhongyao Zazhi 38:2586–2589. https://doi.org/10.4268/cjcmm20131608

Tanaka H, Fukuda N, Shoyama Y (1999) Formation of monoclonal antibody against a major ginseng component, ginsenoside Rb1 and its characterization. Cytotechnology 29:115–120. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008068718392

Fukuda N, Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (2000) Formation of monoclonal antibody against a major ginseng component, ginsenoside Rg1 and its characterization: Monoclonal antibody for a ginseng saponin. Cytotechnology 34:197–204. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008162703957

Morinaga O, Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (2000) Production of monoclonal antibody against a major purgative component, sennoside A, its characterization and ELISA. Analyst 125:1109–1113. https://doi.org/10.1039/b000988l

Morinaga O, Nakajima S, Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (2001) Production of monoclonal antibodies against a major purgative component, sennoside B, their characterization and use in ELISA. Analyst 126:1372–1376. https://doi.org/10.1039/b103153h

Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (1998) Formation of a monoclonal antibody against glycyrrhizin and development of an ELISA. Biol Pharm Bull 21:1391–1393. https://doi.org/10.1248/bpb.21.1391

Phrompittayarat W, Putalun W, Tanaka H, Jetiyanon K, Wlttaya-Areekul S, Ingkaninan K (2007) Determination of pseudojujubogenin glycosides from Brahmi based on immunoassay using a monoclonal antibody against bacopaside I. Phytochem Anal 18:411–418. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.996

Juengwatanatrakul T, Sritularak B, Amornnopparattanakul P, Tassanawat P, Putalun W, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2011) Preparation of a specific monoclonal antibody to asiaticoside for the development of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Analyst 136:1013–1017. https://doi.org/10.1039/c0an00868k

Morinaga O, Tanaka H, Shoyama Y (2006) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the determination of total ginsenosides in ginseng. Anal Lett 39:287–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/00032710500476979

Komaikul J, Kitisripanya T, Tanaka H, Sritularak B, Putalun W (2014) Development of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for specific detection of mulberroside A in mulberry ( Morus alba L.) using anti-mulberroside a polyclonal antibody. Food Anal Methods 7:58–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-013-9598-4

Sakamoto S, Yusakul G, Pongkitwitoon B, Paudel MK, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2015) Simultaneous determination of soy isoflavone glycosides, daidzin and genistin by monoclonal antibody-based highly sensitive indirect competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Food Chem 169:127–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.08.004

Kitisripanya T, Krittanai S, Udomsin O, Jutathis K, Komaikul J, Juengwatanatrakul T, Sakamoto S, Tanaka H, Morimoto S, Putalun W (2017) Development of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for determination of miroestrol using an anti-miroestrol monoclonal antibody. Planta Med 83:855–861. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-102689

Sakamoto S, Yusakul G, Tsuneura Y, Putalun W, Usui K, Miyamoto T, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2017) Sodium periodate-mediated conjugation of harringtonine enabling the production of a highly specific monoclonal antibody, and the development of a sensitive quantitative analysis method. Analyst 142:1140–1148. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6an02751b

Sakamoto S, Nagamitsu R, Yusakul G, Miyamoto T, Tanaka H, Morimoto S (2017) Ultrasensitive immunoassay for monocrotaline using monoclonal antibody produced by N,N’ -carbonyldiimidazole mediated hapten-carrier protein conjugates. Talanta 168:67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.03.028

Limsuwanchote S, Wungsintaweekul J, Keawpradub N, Putalun W, Morimoto S, Tanaka H (2015) Development of indirect competitive ELISA for quantification of mitragynine in Kratom ( Mitragyna speciosa (Roxb.) Korth.). Forensic Sci Int 244:70–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.08.011

Paudel MK, Shirota O, Sasaki-Tabata K, Tanaka H, Sekita S, Morimoto S (2013) Development of an enzyme immunoassay using a monoclonal antibody against the psychoactive diterpenoid salvinorin A. J Nat Prod 76:1654–1660. https://doi.org/10.1021/np400358n

Udomsin O, Krittanai S, Kitisripanya T, Tanaka H, Putalun W (2017) A new highly selective and specific anti-puerarin polyclonal antibody for determination of puerarin using a mannich reaction hapten conjugate. Pharmacogn Mag 13:S845–S851. https://doi.org/10.4103/pm.pm_276_17

Sai J, Zhao Y, Shan W, Qu B, Zhang Y, Cheng J, Qu H, Wang Q (2016) Development of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and immunoaffinity column chromatography for saikosaponin d using an anti-saikosaponin d monoclonal antibody. Planta Med 82:432–439. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1568182

Kitisripanya T, Jutathis K, Inyai C, Komaikul J, Udomsin O, Tanaka H, Putalun W (2017) Development of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of isomiroestrol, an identical marker, in White Kwao Krua using a monoclonal antibody. J Pharm Biomed Anal 137:229–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2017.01.040

Yusakul G, Togita R, Minami K, Chanpokapaiboon K, Juengwatanatrakul T, Putalun W, Tanaka H, Sakamoto S, Morimoto S (2019) An indirect competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay toward the standardization of Pueraria candollei based on its unique isoflavonoid, kwakhurin. Fitoterapia 133:23–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fitote.2018.12.010

Nuntawong P, Tanaka H, Sakamoto S, Morimoto S (2020) ELISA for the detection of the prohibited doping agent higenamine. Planta Med 86:760–766. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1181-2084

Sae-Foo W, Krittanai S, Juengsanguanpornsuk W, Yusakul G, Kitisripanya T, Sakamoto S, Putalun W (2021) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using fragment antigen-binding (Fab) antibody for determination of deoxymiroestrol, a potent phytoestrogen from Pueraria candollei . Food Agric Immunol 32:336–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540105.2021.1946486

Liu C, Wang Y, Zhang L, Qin J, Dou X, Fu Y, Li Q, Zhao X, Yang M (2020) An integrated strategy for rapid on-site screening and determination of prometryn residues in herbs. Anal Bioanal Chem 412:621–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-019-02224-z

Li Y, Liu L, Song S, Kuang H (2018) Development of a gold nanoparticle immunochromatographic assay for the on-site analysis of 6-benzylaminopurine residues in bean sprouts. Food Agric Immunol 29:14–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540105.2017.1354359

Ding Y, Hua X, Chen H, Gonzalez-Sapienza G, Barnych B, Liu F, Wang M, Hammock BD (2019) A dual signal immunochromatographic strip for the detection of imidaclothiz using a recombinant fluorescent-peptide tracer and gold nanoparticles. Sensors Actuators B Chem 297:126714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2019.126714

Yao L, Liu L, Song S, Kuang H, Xu C (2017) Development of indirect competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent and immunochromatographic strip assays for carbofuran detection in fruits and vegetables. Food Agric Immunol 28:639–651. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540105.2017.1309359

Chen ZJ, Wu HL, Xiao ZL, Fu HJ, Shen YD, Luo L, Wang H, Lei HT, Hongsibsong S, Xu ZL (2021) Rational hapten design to produce high-quality antibodies against carbamate pesticides and development of immunochromatographic assays for simultaneous pesticide screening. J Hazard Mater 412:125241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125241

Liu B, Gong H, Wang Y, Zhang X, Li P, Qiu Y, Wang L, Hua X, Guo Y, Wang M, Liu F, Liu X, Zhang C (2018) A gold immunochromatographic assay for simultaneous detection of parathion and triazophos in agricultural products. Anal Methods 10:422–428. https://doi.org/10.1039/c7ay02481a

Wang YD, Qin JA, Wu L, Wang BM, Eremin S, Yang SH, Yang MH (2021) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and immunochromatographic strip for rapid detection of atrazine in three medicinal herbal roots. World J Tradit Chinese Med 7:97–103. https://doi.org/10.4103/wjtcm.wjtcm_76_20

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan

Poomraphie Nuntawong, Satoshi Morimoto & Seiichi Sakamoto

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, 40002, Thailand

Waraporn Putalun

School of Pharmacy, Sanyo-Onoda City University, 1-1-1 Daigakudouri, Sanyo-onoda-shi, Yamaguchi, 756-0884, Japan

Hiroyuki Tanaka

Research Group for Pharmaceutical Activities of Natural Products Using Pharmaceutical Biotechnology (PANPB), National Research University-Khon Kaen, Khon Kaen, Thailand

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seiichi Sakamoto .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, 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 changes were made. 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/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Nuntawong, P., Putalun, W., Tanaka, H. et al. Lateral flow immunoassay for small-molecules detection in phytoproducts: a review. J Nat Med 76 , 521–545 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-022-01605-6

Download citation

Received : 24 November 2021

Accepted : 29 January 2022

Published : 16 February 2022

Issue Date : June 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-022-01605-6

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

• Immunoassay
• Immunochromatographic strip test
• Lateral flow immunoassay
• Plant secondary metabolites
• Small molecules
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research