was reviewed

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "was reviewed" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to indicate that something has been examined or evaluated in the past. Example: "The report was reviewed by the committee before the final decision was made."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Academia

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

Each tool was reviewed by one reviewer.

BMJ Open

Each paper was reviewed by at least three reviewers.

Springer

His application was reviewed.

The New Yorker

"It was reviewed.

The New York Times

Instead, each case was reviewed individually.

The New York Times

One more time," was reviewed in Artnet.

The New York Times

The game was reviewed on a PS3.

The Guardian - Tech

DmC was reviewed on the Xbox 360.

The Guardian - Tech

The manuscript was reviewed by all authors.

Nature

The proposal was reviewed and flatly denied.

University of California, Berkeley

Literature was reviewed to clarify its physiopathology.

Journal of Neuroradiology

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "was reviewed", ensure the context clearly indicates who performed the review and what criteria were used. This adds clarity and authority to your statement.

Common error

Avoid using "was reviewed" without specifying the reviewer, as this can create ambiguity. Instead of saying 'The document was reviewed', specify 'The document was reviewed by the committee' for clarity.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "was reviewed" functions as a passive construction indicating that a subject has undergone examination or evaluation. Ludwig provides numerous examples showcasing its use in diverse contexts, affirming its grammatical correctness and versatility.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

32%

Science

38%

Academia

30%

Less common in

Formal & Business

0%

Encyclopedias

0%

Wiki

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, the phrase "was reviewed" is a grammatically sound and frequently used passive construction indicating that something has been examined or evaluated. As Ludwig AI confirms, its usage spans various contexts, including news, science, and academia. To enhance clarity, specifying the reviewer is recommended. Alternative phrases such as "was assessed" or "was examined" may be suitable depending on the intended nuance.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

was assessed

Emphasizes the evaluation or appraisal aspect.

was evaluated

Highlights a more formal and systematic judgment process.

was examined

Focuses on a detailed inspection or investigation.

was inspected

Implies a close and careful observation, often for compliance.

was scrutinized

Emphasizes a thorough and critical examination.

was audited

Suggests a formal verification, typically for financial or procedural correctness.

was investigated

Focuses on a systematic inquiry into a matter.

was checked

Indicates a simpler, often routine, verification.

was reconsidered

Implies a renewed thought and evaluation.

was revised

Highlights changes or corrections made after review.

FAQs

How to use "was reviewed" in a sentence?

The phrase "was reviewed" indicates that something has been examined or evaluated. For example, "The manuscript "was reviewed" by all authors".

What can I say instead of "was reviewed"?

You can use alternatives such as "was assessed", "was evaluated", or "was examined" depending on the specific context.

What's the difference between "was reviewed" and "was assessed"?

"Was reviewed" generally means to look over something again, while "was assessed" implies a more formal and systematic evaluation to determine its value or quality.

Is it better to use active or passive voice with "was reviewed"?

While "was reviewed" is in the passive voice, it's often better to use the active voice for clarity. For example, instead of "The policy "was reviewed"", say "The committee reviewed the policy".