Writing Assignment #2

When doing research, whether for school or your own personal motives, you may come across articles which can be either primary or secondary. A primary article can be defined as the original source of a new set of information while a secondary article would be considered anything else based on the original research. In order to tell the two apart , primary articles have few distinguishing characteristics that set them apart. They typically have subheadings like materials/methods so you know exactly what they did in their research ;or discussion/conclusion in which they explain the results of their experiments. An example of a primary article would be like the first reports on a new drug.

A secondary article could also be called a review article. Review articles provide summaries of previously researched topics, unlike primary articles that are writing about new information. Although they don’t present any new information, review articles are helpful in combining the data of existing studies. They are beneficial to researchers because it can help them determine trends in research and point us to where new research is needed.

Most of the articles required for assignments are going to need to be peer reviewed. This process validates a researcher’s work, showing it can be a trusted source. But not every source is a peer reviewed source because of how long the process can take. It starts with the researcher that sends in their new findings to a journal editor. The journal editor is the first to review the article, determining whether or not it meets the requirements of the journal. The article is then sent to be peer reviewed. This is done normally by other researchers  that are in the same field of expertise, in which they critically evaluate the article for any weaknesses. The article can then be rejected or approved, but even when approved may still be expected to be revised. The journal editor then gives the final approvals for the article to be published.

From the two articles provided, I believe that the “Base editing of hematopoietic stem cells rescues sickle cell disease in mice” is the primary article and “ Hematopoietic stem cell gene-addition: editing therapy in SCD” is the review article.  What pointed the primary article out to me was the subheadings of the article like results, discussion, and methods; which explained each step of their experiment. The review article was put together as if it was a collection of information from different sources. It also contained an extensive reference list further backing up my reasoning.