I believe that writing a review article is more difficult and more time consuming as it needs a good understanding of the topic. When I was doing my post-doc at INRS-ETE, I wrote a review article with the help of well known co-authors. I spent much more time on this article than my other articles. It was a rewarding learning experience as I learned many new things in the process. The article is cited 123 times in Google scholar. I am thankful to my peers at INRS-ETE especially Prof. André St-Hilaire for their help.

Article A Review of Statistical Methods for the Evaluation of Aquati...

I think Publishing a research paper in a good(High impact factor) journal is more difficult. 

Speaking from personal experience, writing a good review/survey paper is as difficult as writing a technical, original, paper, often more! A survey forces upon the author some demands that are NOT necessarily there when writing a technical paper: being as complete as is possible regarding which papers from the past that are cited, and how; motivating the paper is sometimes less easy, as there is perhaps not any new material in the sense of new theory/methodology. There is also the problem of page limits: a technical paper may not need that many pages, but a review/survey paper is by definition something that demands more space. It is also the matter of the usefulness of a review paper (linked to the motivation of its existence) - it must contribute something that is much more than simply a list of what has been done in the past. THAT list-type of survey I have seen several times, and they are indeed fairly pointless. The survey must integrate the past research, provide a synthesis, as well as criticize bad things and/or praise good things, and very importantly point towards good future research avenues. Doing all of this while most often having the same page limit as for "standard" technical papers is a hassle. :-) Hope this helps. Are you planning on doing this, by any chance?

Dear Michael, thanks for your valuable thoughts and opinions, I agree that a good review/survey paper also needs much analysis and time, thorough reviewing of past literature, focusing limitations and advantages and a future perspective / implications. I am planning both, and especially quality review/perspective papers on emerging and important  issues in my area of expertise/experiences.

I think we will know my own work better, so it's easier to write our own research paper.  To write a review paper may need us to be equally knowledgeable about a larger scope; this will be more difficult.  So I wish you patience and persistence, Kuldeep, for this task.  (So far, I have contributed in Scopus based journal only. But early this month I sent a research paper to a journal with IF 2.64.  I can expect to do corrections.)

Dear Miranda, Thanks for your opinions but as authors/co-authors Review papers are also one's own/ours creditable matters as we say that this is my research paper. Best wishes for a good research paper  submitted in 2.64 IF. I am also happy that I say you active today on RG.

Please do not worry about Impact factor but choose an appropriate journal. Do a thorough review job. Read original papers. Do not plan to write a review on the basis of five other reviews. Do not depend on Abstracts either. Please do add some of your own data. Cite work in tabular form, Suggest your hypothesis in diagrammatic manner. All the best.

In my view collection of the reference information is more to write a review paper. I think a researcher should write a review paper so that he a could get acquainted with the kind of research going on that area. But this would be very difficult for a new researcher as suggested by Ruchi Tiwari and Miranda Yeoh.

A true researcher must write a review paper in his tenure of research.

Thanks Dr Mathur for useful tips regarding improving presentation of a review paper. I agree that we need to worry for IF and submit in an appropriate journal, if it is good it would be cited by others and thus its aim would be fulfilled.

Pl see the link below:  "Life without Journal Impact Factor" (NAAS India Newsletter)

http://naasindia.org/announcements/newsletter.pdf

Now hH index is coming - honest H index --- emphasizing that instead of IF - H index, i-10 etc need to be considering for evaluating any researcher. 

Thanks to Dr Tiwari also, a young researcher need to be involved in writing with some senior for learning few useful writing/compilation skills and presentations, and plagiarism free manner. And also that a true researcher must write reviews.

I believe that writing a review article is more difficult and more time consuming as it needs a good understanding of the topic. When I was doing my post-doc at INRS-ETE, I wrote a review article with the help of well known co-authors. I spent much more time on this article than my other articles. It was a rewarding learning experience as I learned many new things in the process. The article is cited 123 times in Google scholar. I am thankful to my peers at INRS-ETE especially Prof. André St-Hilaire for their help.

Article A Review of Statistical Methods for the Evaluation of Aquati...

Many congrats Dear Behrouz, 123 citations for a single review counts much Keep this spirit up, after writing 3-4 more reviews you will become expert in paper/review writing skills and editing. So it is more time consuming but more rewarding too like in your case. Review is always cited more compared to regular research articles.

Dear @Kuldeep, I think that writing a review paper can be very easy or very difficult; this depends on the topic of the review paper whether it is relevant to the research topic or not.

Dear Abedallah, I could not understand "whether it is relevant to the research topic or not",  Pl let me make more clear about this.

Start with a review. Use that to find out what the problems really are, and what topic you wish to research. (You have first pick!) Then do your research, and write your paper. 

Writing and Publishing a research is quite easy as it is an exclusive output of the researcher.

This is completely a positive work, which the researcher can trim and elongate the output as per the deliverable required.

writing review will give a compiled ideas about the topic if someone is planning to work. for eg next generation vaccines for fmd, though tons of research is going on fmd still there is outbreak and a fresher to start his work he can go through good reviews and plan his work. but the problem in review writing is most people will not do anything and just write about the topic, where they miss hands on experience and credits will be shared between people who spend time to collect information and edit and put it into a form and added persons who doesnt contribute anything but makes him as expert.

the editor should scrutinize the authors list to avoid such activities.

In fact The authors should have some original contributions in the areas of review articles they coauthor. Reviews must contain some of their original/ unpublished data also

Writing review is difficult job sir.

Let's first be honest - have we not more than once read a published review paper that was lousy? My favourite hate object is the "list version" of a review, where there is simply a headline, below which there is basically only a string of reference numbers ("see [45--67]") to the papers in question, and maybe some short remarks - no synthesis, no opinions, no discussion on what could have been done but wasn't, and why; no serious and detailed connection to anything else.