How to write a document review: a practical checklist
A document review examines published information rather than testing the item in use. It should answer a defined reader question, identify the reviewed documents and separate the manufacturer’s claims from the reviewer’s conclusions. State that method at the opening so the reader knows what evidence the review can provide.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Declare that the review is based on documents.
- Separate verified identity, attributed claims and unknowns.
- Do not invent wear results, star ratings or test observations.
Define the review question
Write the reader’s question and comparison criteria before gathering claims. Useful criteria might be document clarity, model identity or the stated product-system scope. These can be assessed from documents; comfort and real-world performance require different evidence.
Make a document inventory and evidence table
List each document’s title, issuer, model or product, edition/revision, date if supplied, URL and access date. Then create rows for claim, supporting passage, conditions, evidence type and remaining gap. This makes a dated manual distinguishable from an undated shop summary and prevents a brand’s repeated description from becoming an invented hands-on observation.
A bounded evidence row
A document-based example asks whether a shared shade name identifies one product system. OPI’s Bubble Bath page has separate sections titled “Bubble Bath® Nail Lacquer” and “Bubble Bath® Gel Nail Polish”. Using the defined fields, the proposed evidence row is: claim—the Bubble Bath shade name is shared across distinct product systems; supporting passage—both system headings; conditions—this name comparison concerns the OPI page; evidence type—manufacturer webpage headings; remaining gap—the headings do not establish identical formulas. No coating was applied for this example. [1]
A proposed pre-publication checklist
Before closing the review, check six items: the opening names the document-only method; every claim row has an exact passage; the document matches the named product and version; manufacturer claims are attributed; unknowns remain explicit; the conclusion answers the original question and discloses relevant commercial relationships. Mark each item checked or unresolved, with a note for the repair required. This checklist is a proposed writing aid.
Write a conclusion that answers the review question
Conclude with the documented answer, its conditions and the decisive missing information. Include the reviewed object, document versions and review method. Disclose relevant commercial relationships and any independent measurements actually performed; if none were performed, say so. Do not add a star score, comfort claim or wear result to make a document review look like a product test.
Article Sources
Written and reviewed with AI assistance using the linked sources. No hands-on product testing or independent specialist review was performed.
Commercial resource from our ecosystem
Professional nail materials and tools with NailMarket.eu — a shop in our ecosystem.
NailWiki, BELOM, NailMarket, BELOM App and NaNails are projects of BELOM Group OÜ, as identified by the owner. Molokom catalogue images are supplied through our NaNails shop; this commercial relationship is not independent product-test evidence.
