Many bench scientists cannot write good reviews, because they do not have the necessary skills in writing, critical thinking, insight, or creativity. The best review papers are often written by senior, experienced people. Such experience brings a breadth and depth of understanding that cannot be acquired in graduate school. Too many young scientists think that the only important science is that which is being done now or no more than a year or so ago.
There seems to be a special role here for older scientists who often do less bench research, because they have been "left behind" by new techniques, new research fads, new-era grant-review panels, or by a bias of grant agencies for young investigators. Older scientists can get "out in front" again by writing reviews, the need for which grows with the growth in primary literature.
