what question are you trying to answer, and for whom).Over the time, you become more stable and able to give wise advice.In fact, while I’m trying my best in this process, sometimes, as an academic, I’m suffering from “bad” review on my papers.Third, I see this review process as a public service. I have also served as an Editorial board member for some journals, like Applied Soft Computing, by Elsevier (I. Over these years, my experience in the review has been improved gradually.I tried my best to help authors to improve their works by giving useful feedback, and I hope others look as critical and constructive to my own work. I reached to an understanding that, reviewing, criticizing, giving feedback to others’ works is an art.I have written a few review papers, and this is my approach.There are doubtless others that are equally effective, and some of these will be faster, but the approach that I will suggest is one that is thorough and defensible.Work out how you will structure the paper, what key points you want to highlight, and what the story is that you will be telling through your review.Often, good review papers will include figures that combine results from the literature that you have searched through to tell readers something new, either through new, collated representations of data that show new, emergent relationships, or through new conceptual models that will help others to think about the topic in a new way and structure future research. Also think carefully about who your intended audience will be. Over the past seven years, I have reviewed more than 150 scientific papers in my field. First, I’m getting the most up-to-date papers by this work.Second, you know what others do in research, hence, the review broadens your scope. I got many certificates, appreciations, and awards for my reviews and feedbacks for those papers I reviewed.