CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Academic Writing and PublishingPublishing and Scholarly CommunicationMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

How to Write a Scholarly Book Review for Publication in a Peer-Reviewed Journal: A Review of the Literature

Open access
Lee, Alexander D., Green, Bart N., Johnson, Claire D., Nyquist, Julie·2010·Journal of Chiropractic Education
DOI 10.7899/1042-5055-24.1.57PMC PMC2870990
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Purpose: To describe and discuss the processes used to write scholarly book reviews for publication in peer-reviewed journals and to provide a recommended strategy and book appraisal worksheet to use when conducting book reviews. Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature was conducted in June 2009 using a combination of controlled vocabulary and truncated text words to capture articles relevant to writing scholarly book reviews for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Results: The initial search identified 839 citations. Following the removal of duplicates and the application of selection criteria, a total of 78 articles were included in this review including narrative commentaries (n = 26), editorials or journal announcements (n = 25), original research (n = 18), and journal correspondence pieces (n D 9). Discussion: Recommendations for planning and writing an objective and quality book review are presented based on the evidence gleaned from the articles reviewed and from the authors' experiences. A worksheet for conducting a book review is provided. Conclusions: The scholarly book review serves many purposes and has the potential to be an influential literary form. The process of publishing a successful scholarly book review requires the reviewer to appreciate the book review publication process and to be aware of the skills and strategies involved in writing a successful review.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7899/1042-5055-24.1.57

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 79

  1. Shenai JP. The art of the book review: exploration of health science. J Perinatol 2000;20:211-2.
  2. Cooper SS. The book review: a significant educational resource. J Nurs Educ 1974;13:41-44.
  3. Millar B. Book reviews--keeping up to date in the era of the information super highway. J Clin Nurs 1999;8:485-6.
  4. Methven RC. The book review: an educational tool. Midwifery 1988;4:133-7.
  5. Rassool GH. Moving in the right direction: first step in writing for publication in nursing. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem 2005;13:1035-8.
  6. Peate I. The anatomy of a book review. Br J Healthcare Assist 2008;2:249-50.
  7. Cortada JW. Five ways to be a terrible book reviewer. J Scholarly Publishing 1998;30:34.
  8. Hartley J. Reading and writing book reviews across the disciplines. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 2006;57: 1194-207.
  9. Dreher MC. What is a book review? Nurs Outlook 1983;31:64.
  10. Johnson M. Writing a book review: towards a more critical approach. Nurse Educ Today 1995;15:228-31.
  11. George S, Dharmadhikari A. Writing a book review: frequently asked questions answered. [Review] [3 refs]. Br J Hosp Med 2008;69:M30-M31.
  12. Aiken D. Writing book reviews. Phys Ther 1978;58: 1361-2.
  13. Hill K. Book reviewing: keeping the audience in mind. Nurse Author Editor 1997;7:4-8.
  14. Ackerman AB. Are book reviews in medical journals worthy? Am J Dermatopathol 1986;8:461.
  15. Biley FC. Reviewing books: expanding the boundaries of rigour, creativity and imagination. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2005;12:511-2.
  16. Burd A. Book reviewers and book reviews: potential conflict of interest. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009;62:446.
  17. Burd A. Book reviews, review of books, reviews and reviewers. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2008;61: 479-80.
  18. Puetz BE. To start writing, try a book review. J Nurs Staff Dev 1993;9:7.
  19. Burnard P. Books, books reviews and writing. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2005;12:257-8.
  20. Conway P. Writing a book review for JFSW. J Fam Soc Work 2008;11:91-92.
  21. Crown S, Lee A, Ramsay R. And now the book reviews. Br J Psychiatry 2000;177:388-9.
  22. Wessely S. A review of reviewing. Br J Psychiatry 2000;177:388-9.
  23. Johnson EW. The book review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1995;74:89.
  24. Johnson EW. Your basic book review or, how to lose friends (authors' mothers) and maltreat people (authors) by trying hard. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1988;67:135-6.
  25. Moore FD. What's in a review. N Engl J Med 1981;304:840-1.
  26. Hendee WR. Writing book reviews. Health Phys 1987;53:565-6.
  27. Weisse AB. A loss of literacy? A century of changing substance and style in medical book reviewing. Hosp Pract (Minneap) 2001;36:9-10.
  28. Watson R. Another message from the book reviews editor. J Adv Nurs 1999;29:1283-4.
  29. Williamson GR. What makes a good book review? J Adv Nurs 2005;50:119.
  30. Watson R. A message from the book reviews editor. J Adv Nurs 1998;27:1103.
  31. Toner PG. Who wants book reviews? J Pathol 1997;183:127-8.
  32. Squires BP. Book reviews: what editors expect from reviewers. Can Med Assoc J 1990;142:935.
  33. Goldmann DR. Medical writings: a new section for annals. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:83.
  34. Goldmann DR. Medical writings revisited. Ann Intern Med 1999;131:389-90.
  35. Pyle GF. Book reviews: expectations and parameters. Soc Sci Med 2000;50:603-4.
  36. Vickers FN. Pleasures and tribulations of a book reviewer. J Fla Med Assoc 1989;76:301-2.
  37. Anderson Jr. A note on book reviews. Histopathology 1989;14:227-8.
  38. Bass A. Disclosing bias in book review. Health Aff (Millwood) 2008;27:1748-9.
  39. Hopper KD. Is reform needed in the book review process? Radiology 1989;171:878.
  40. Isaacson PG. Response to: A note on book reviews. Histopathology 1989;14:227-9.
  41. Gelenberg AJ. Disclosing bias: the author responds. Health Aff (Millwood) 2008;27:1748-9.
  42. Roland CG. Thoughts about medical writing. XI: On reviewing bad books. Anesth Analg 1972;51:462-3.
  43. Thompsell A. Book reviews in the electronic age. Br J Psychiatry 2001;178:277.
  44. Weinman D. Responsibility of the editor for the contents of a book review. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1969;18:640.
  45. Shelley WB. How not to write a book review. Arch Dermatol 1989;125:1431.
  46. Boring EG. The book review. Am J Psychol 1951;64:281-3.
  47. Watkin B. Review with pen in hand. Health Soc Serv J 1980;90:1505.
  48. Toase M. How to read a book--or, the art of reviewing. Midwives Chron 1983;96:361-2.
  49. Lincoln T. The book review business. Nature 1983;302:757.
  50. King LS. The book review. JAMA 1968;205:343-4.
  51. Burgdorf WH. Reviewing medical books: a quarter century of observations. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008;59:e1-e3.
  52. Poteet GW, Edlund BJ, Hodges LC. Promoting scholarship for graduate education. Nurse Educ Today 1987;7:97-102.
  53. Koch SL. Medical book reviewing from the specialist's standpoint. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1953;41:148-50.
  54. Farr AD. Book reviews in scientific journals. Med Lab Sci 1981;38:75-76.
  55. Young RC, Jr., Rachal RE, Morgan AL. Maximizing communication skills in graduate and postgraduate health-care education through medical writing. J Natl Med Assoc 1991;83:691-6.
  56. Henige D. Reviewing reviewing [review process for scholarly publications]. J Scholarly Publishing 2001;33:23.
  57. Simon L. The pleasures of book reviewing: suggestions for how to get started as a book reviewer, when one should not review a particular book and how the review publication process works. J Scholarly Publishing 1996;27:237.
  58. Owen S, Maslin-Prothero SE. Developing your research profile. Nurse Educ Pract 2001;1:5-11.
  59. Furnham A. Book reviews as a selection tool for librarians. Collect Manage 1986;8:33-43.
  60. Miranda EO. On book reviewing. J Educ Thought 1996;30:191-202.
  61. Kroenke K. Book reviews in medical journals. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1986;74:1-5.
  62. Davis RM, Neale AV, Monsur JC. Medical journals' conflicts of interest in the publication of book reviews. Sci Eng Ethics 2003;9:471-83.
  63. Morton PY. Medical book reviewing. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1983;71:202-6.
  64. Martin LM. The evaluation of biomedical book reviews by academic health sciences librarians. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1986;74:157-60.
  65. Chen CC. Biomedical book reviewing. Nature 1973;242: 577-8.
  66. Chen CC, Wright AM. Current status of biomedical book reviewing. I. Key biomedical reviewing journals with quantitative significance. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1974;62:105-12.
  67. Chen CC. Current status of biomedical book reviewing. II. Time lag in biomedical book reviewing. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1974;62:113-9.
  68. Chen CC. Current status of biomedical book reviewing. Part III: Duplication patterns in biomedical book reviewing. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1974;62:296-301.
  69. Chen CC. Current status of biomedical book reviewing. Part IV: Major American and British biomedical book publishers. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1974;62:302-7.
  70. Chen CC. Current status of biomedical book reviewing. Part V: Most frequently reviewed biomedical books in 1970. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1974;62:309-13.
  71. Golubic R, Rudes M, Kovacic N, Marusic M, Marusic A. Calculating impact factor: how bibliographical classification of journal items affects the impact factor of large and small journals. Sci Eng Ethics 2008;14:41-9.
  72. Atwood R. An index to medical book reviews: a computer experiment. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1967;55:66-69.
  73. Truelson SD, Jr. Selecting for health sciences library collections when budgets falter. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1976;64:187-95.
  74. Wilkinson MJ, Rapley DM, Gadsby R, Cohen MA. Does the BJGP need more fizz and pop? A Midland faculty readership survey. Br J Gen Pract 1997;47:145-9.
  75. Wilson JE. An evaluation of medical book reviews. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1945;33:305-14.
  76. Berlin E, Fisher A. Two thumbs up: a survey of librarian-book reviewers. Libr Collect Acquis Tech Serv 2004;28:312-34.
  77. Furnham A. The positive consequences of being negative: the perception of a critical reviewer. J Soc Behav Pers 1997;12:585-94.
  78. Motta-Roth D. Rhetorical features and disciplinary cultures: a genre-based study of academic book reviews in linguistics, chemistry, and economics. [dissertation]. Florianopolis, Brazil: Federal University of Santa Catarina; 1995. In: Hartley J. Reading and writing book reviews across the disciplines. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 2006;57:1194-207.
  79. ICMJE.org. [Internet]. Philadelphia: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors;  2009 [cited 2009 Nov 20]. ICMJE Uniform requirements for manuscripts conflicts of interest. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/ethical 4conflicts.html.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 39

Metadata

Authors
Lee, A. D., Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Nyquist, J.
Affiliations
  • Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CA)
  • Naval Medical Center San Diego (US)
  • National University of Health Sciences (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Nyquist, Julie
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Chiropractic Education
Publisher
Brighthall
Published
2010-04
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
57-69
ISSN
  • 1042-5055 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-250X
DOI
10.7899/1042-5055-24.1.57
PMC
PMC2870990
OpenAlex
W2169388571
Cited by
39
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
11.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Chiropractic Education (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
scholarly book reviews, book reviewing, peer-reviewed journal publication, writing strategies, review planning, narrative commentary

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How to Write a Scholarly Book Review for Publication in a Peer-Reviewed Journal: A Review of the Literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7899/1042-5055-24.1.57
The paper
Lee, A. D., Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Nyquist, J. (2010). How to Write a Scholarly Book Review for Publication in a Peer-Reviewed Journal: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Chiropractic Education. https://doi.org/10.7899/1042-5055-24.1.57