COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR:
A review should be more than a compilation of the results reported in literature (i.e. just copy and paste), it should in fact be a critical assessment of the present knowledge with some clear conclusions what all these results mean, and what are the perspectives and directions for future research and potential applications. E.g. of the various methods reported a thorough analysis should be made, how ell is the separation in chromatography, how much overlap does occur, the same for other methods. How do the methods compare, do they give similar results? Concerning the LC and GC systems are the methods used very similar, or if not, why different methods (better, faster, more simple for sample preparation, reproducibility). For a number of cases the objective is the same, which one is the best one of these?
So what is the real idea of a review: the reader should afterwards be able to make decisions about what directions to go, what has already been shown to be not promising and what looks promising. It should be a source of inspiration and not just be a collection of facts, it should contribute to the discussion in the field, to be critical and thus result in improving the field. Your work is the first step towards such a landmark review, what is needed is make a critical assessment of all the data you have collected. With all the information in your hand it should be possible to make an excellent review. I hope you will take the challenge to make this next step and in due time submit such a review. Thanks for your interest to publish in the journal. 返回小木虫查看更多