Narrative Reviews in Contemporary Medical Literature: An Overview of Current Role and Relevance

Narrative reviews remain the most prevalent article type in the biomedical literature; however, their methodological properties and clinical relevance are often poorly understood compared with more formal review designs. This review examines the definition and historical context of the narrative review; its role in supporting evidence-based clinical practice; the quality standards and limitations governing its conduct; its relationship with systematic, scoping, and integrative review methodologies; and emerging technological influences, including large language models and machine learning. Evidence from the peer-reviewed literature reveals that narrative reviews serve an indispensable function in synthesizing heterogeneous evidence, communicating complex findings to clinical audiences, and addressing topics for which structured evidence is scarce. However, they are susceptible to selection bias and inadequate reporting and require structured quality appraisal frameworks to maximize their scientific value. Establishing transparent authorship standards and cautiously integrating computational assistance are essential steps in ensuring that narrative reviews remain reliable contributors to medical knowledge.