article was reviewed by

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "article was reviewed by" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when indicating that a particular article has undergone a review process by a specific individual or group, often in academic or professional contexts. Example: "The article was reviewed by Dr. Smith, who provided valuable feedback on the research methodology."

✓ Grammatically correct

Science

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Reviewers This article was reviewed by Dr Andrew Clark.

Biology Direct

Generally each article was reviewed by one non-physician, health-based academic and one medical practitioner.

Plosone

The article was reviewed by all authors.

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

This article was reviewed by: Profs.

Biology Direct

This article was reviewed by Pr.

Biology Direct

This article was reviewed by Erik van Nimwegen.

Biology Direct

This article was reviewed by Jun Yu and Zhang Zhang.

Biology Direct

This article was reviewed by Jerzy Jurka and Anton Nekrutenko.

Biology Direct

This article was reviewed by RA Gatenby and M Kimmel.

Biology Direct

This article was reviewed by Lakshminarayan Iyer and Fyodor Kondrashov.

Biology Direct

This article was reviewed by Valerian Dolja and Gáspár Jékely.

Biology Direct

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "article was reviewed by", ensure clarity about the reviewers' qualifications to enhance credibility.

Common error

Avoid stating simply that "the article was reviewed by experts" without specifying who those experts are or their relevant credentials. Providing names or affiliations adds authority.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "article was reviewed by" functions as a passive construction used to indicate that an article has undergone a process of evaluation or assessment. As Ludwig AI confirms, this phrase is grammatically sound and commonly employed. It highlights the action of reviewing and identifies the agent responsible for that action.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

Science

100%

Less common in

News & Media

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Academia

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "article was reviewed by" is a grammatically correct and very common phrase used to indicate that an article has undergone evaluation, primarily in scientific contexts. Ludwig AI confirms its validity and usability. When using the phrase, it's important to specify the reviewers to enhance credibility. While alternatives like "article underwent review by" and "article was assessed by" exist, the original phrase remains a clear and effective way to communicate the review process.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

article underwent review by

Replaces the passive voice with a more direct action-oriented phrasing.

article was assessed by

Substitutes "reviewed" with "assessed", indicating a formal evaluation.

review of the article was conducted by

Changes the sentence structure to emphasize the review process.

article was examined by

Replaces "reviewed" with "examined", suggesting a detailed inspection.

article received a review from

Emphasizes the article as the recipient of the review.

the reviewers of the article included

Focuses on the reviewers and their role in assessing the article.

article was subject to review by

Highlights the mandatory or procedural aspect of the review.

the assessment of the article was performed by

Uses more formal vocabulary like "assessment" and "performed".

article's review was the responsibility of

Shifts the focus to the responsibility for conducting the review.

the article's content was vetted by

Replaces "reviewed" with "vetted", which implies careful scrutiny for accuracy and quality.

FAQs

How can I use "article was reviewed by" in a sentence?

You can use "article was reviewed by" to indicate who assessed and provided feedback on the piece, such as "The "article was reviewed by" Dr. Smith before publication".

What can I say instead of "article was reviewed by"?

Alternatives include "article was assessed by", "article underwent review by", or "review of the article was conducted by", depending on the nuance you want to convey.

Which is correct: "article was reviewed by" or "article was edited by"?

Both are correct but have different meanings. "Article was reviewed by" indicates an assessment, while "article was edited by" suggests changes and improvements were made to the text.

What's the difference between "article was reviewed by" and "article was written by"?

"Article was reviewed by" indicates who evaluated the article, whereas "article was written by" indicates who authored it. The reviewer and the author are typically different individuals.