Critical Reviews aim to provide an in-depth understanding of the topic in hand, yet retain their accessibility through an introduction written for the general reader. They should give a critical discussion of the existing state of knowledge of the subject matter, and while not exhaustive in coverage give a balanced assessment of the current primary literature. The implications of recent developments for the wider scientific community should be emphasised.

1. How would you rate this paper? *
   
   Excellent
   Good
   Routine
   Poor/Unacceptable

   
   

2. Is the article scientifically accurate yet accessible to the general research chemist (including PhD students)? *
   
   Yes
   No
   

   
   

3. Would it serve as a useful introduction to the non-expert chemist without being too simple? *
   
   Yes
   No
   

   
   

4. Is the article a well-balanced consideration of the subject? *
   
   Yes
   No
   
   Please indicate in your comments any significant omissions or unnecessary inclusions.

   
   

5. What is your recommendation? *
   
   Accept - unchanged
   Accept - with minor revisions
   Reconsider - after major revisions
   Reject
   
   Your recommendation cannot be used unless justification is provided. Please support your recommendation in your comments.

   
   

If you recommend acceptance you must provide details to support this decision and you should outline any revisions (which should be achievable within 10 days) required.

If you recommend rejection you must provide details to support this decision. If you feel that work may be suitable for publication elsewhere please indicate the most appropriate journal and format.

Type/paste your comments here: *

OR Upload a document file - MS Word (.doc), plain text (.txt) or Acrobat (.pdf) files only:

OPTIONAL Comments for Editorial Office only: