TASK DETAILS:
Journals have quite strict guidelines on manuscript preparation for the publication of narrative reviews. In order to help you to practice writing to set guidelines (e.g. for preparing reports at work; writing for journals, magazines, newspapers; for writing position statements or policy documents), you will be issued with guidelines for preparing your narrative review. These guidelines have been developed and adapted from real guidelines for authors used by nutrition journals

WHAT IS A NARRATIVE REVIEW?
Reviews rarely generate new knowledge but are designed to surmise what is known about a particular field of research. There are various types of reviews. Some follow prescribed principles to produce a scientifically organised overview (e.g. systematic reviews) or a mathematical summary of existing research (e.g. a meta-analysis). Others adopt a more fluid approach, which, nonetheless, should be thoroughly free from bias
The objectives of a narrative review should be to:
• identify and summarise what has been previously published;
• avoid duplications;
• and seek new study areas not yet addressed. (Adapted from Ferrari 2015)
Narrative reviews should seek to include a range of literature, with varying levels of evidence, which should be acknowledged and where appropriate, evaluated. The main pitfall in producing a narrative review is in bias selection of literature for inclusion, which should be avoided.
Structure, search terms and selection criteria are crucial and should be given considerable thought and attention in advance of writing. See Ferrari (2015), Green et al. (2006) and others for further guidance on these and further issues.
References
• Green, BN., Johnson, C.D., Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine 5(3), 101-117.
• Ferrari, R. (2015). Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing 24(4), 230-235.
WHY ARE THEY IMPORTANT?
Narrative reviews are important because they enable professionals to keep up-to-date with their speciality and/or to familiarise themselves with a new topic. Research is both dynamic and prolific
and as such there is a periodic need to summarise what we know. They are often used as timely reflection before deciding the direction of future research. Unlike systematic reviews and metaanalyses, narrative reviews are rarely used to directly inform clinical practice or change public health guidelines. However, well-conducted narrative reviews can be hugely influential provided that the materials are selected and integrated very carefully, with strict consideration of standards, and that they are very well-written.
PARTICULAR INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS:
Prepare a narrative review (2500 words +/- 10%) that draws upon the appropriate academic literature and demonstrates your ability to analyse and critically evaluate both the published materials and the field of study itself. In accordance with Faculty guidance, markers will stop reading any work that exceeds this word count at 2750 words. Any text beyond this will not be marked and this will likely affect your overall grade. There should be no need to include appendices. Don’t forget to include an abstract (see Guide for Authors) and remember this counts towards your overall word limit. Tables, if included should be limited and are not included in the word limit. Try not to overly rely on direct quotations as this tends to negatively impact on both quality and flow of your work. You must include citations in the text however. Both quotations and citations are included in the word limit. Your reference list is not included in the word limit.
CHOICE OF QUESTION: (This is my narrative writing question that I have chosen)
Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is an immune-mediated and degenerative disease of the nervous system, which affects mostly young adults. Epidemiological evidence demonstrates that deficiency of vitamin D may impact upon disease risk and progression in MS.
Discuss the published evidence for the use of vitamin D supplementation for the prevention and treatment of MS, with particular consideration of evidence quality?
WEIGHTED ASSESSMENT CRITERIA:
Your task will be graded against the following weighted criteria:
• Appropriate academic structure, style and language (20%)
• Discussion and critical analysis of appropriate and pertinent research (70%)
• Standard of referencing (10%)