A primary article is an article written by those whom actually partook in original experiments. Their research and findings are what’s used to create their primary article. While many scientific articles use a meta-analysis approach, where they use data from many different scientific experiments and search and combine it to come to a cohesive conclusion, primary articles use solely what the authors themselves found throughout their research, observations, experiments, and discussions, while also citing and considering the knowledge of their references.

A review article uses the work done by multiple people who conducted the work for primary articles and for lack of better words, expands on them. In a review article, the author studies and analyzes the work from multiple primary articles and tries to find more succinct conclusions and/or answers. Review articles do not prove new experimental data but rather find what may have slipped bethrew the cracks in the primary article phase; in hopes of coming up with more succinct and factual outcomes.

Scientific peer review may be one of the most important steps in the process of publishing work with integrity. Peer review is when an author of a paper initiates a process of engaging peers with expertise In their study to evaluate and critique their work in hopes of getting their hard scientific research published, but this is no easy task. It begins with an editor who reads over the author’s work. Then, if deemed fit for further scrutinization, it is then sent to some of the best in the best in the expertise field of what the article was about. Rarely, does this process end with an immediate publish. Some

journals even reject up to 99% of the journals they receive. The experts will then send back the work with critiques and recommendations to the editor. Once these changes are made, they are able to send the paper again for a new review, and the cycle begins again.