| 查看: 719 | 回复: 2 | |||
| 【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者zsyyasff将赠送您 5 个金币 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
[求助]
一个期刊审稿1个半月，给出大修意见，求大神帮忙分析一下审稿意见
|
|||
|
Dear ***, Thank you for sending your above mentioned manuscript for consideration Your paper has been thoroughly reviewed. To my regret I must inform you that it is not suitable for publication in *** under its present form. If you are willing, however, to address the comments of our reviewers, which I enclose, I will be glad to reconsider this decision after a new peer review. Please highlight in light gray all the passages that you have altered. Furthermore we ask you to submit your answers to all the questions of the reviewers and the editors when you submit the revised manuscript. This facilitates the review, which is to your advantage. Reviewers' comments: Reviewer #1: Dear authors Thank you for your interesting manuscript. The methodology you used is very interesting and precise. Your results are in relation with the searching methods and the factors you decided to evaluate. Nevertheless when you want to compare 2 controversial treatment methods it seems mandatory to speak and identify predictor's factors of the disease and the patients to help the discussion.。。。。。 Reviewer #2:This manuscript describes a meta-analysis of*****。 **** studies were assessed for eligibility. The paper is compact and well written. The methods used in this study are appropriate and the conclusions are generally in lining with the results. However, the main perspective aired in this paper is not so innovative. Besides, I have the following comments. Reviewer #3: 1)Nice and interesting paper, scientific method of review is clearly illustrated 2)Please clarify and if possible analyze the surgical technique 3) If possible to know something more about comorbidities 编辑的这句话To my regret I must inform you that it is not suitable for publication in *** under its present form. If you are willing, however, to address the comments of our reviewers, which I enclose, I will be glad to reconsider this decision after a new peer review. 我怎么觉得编辑这个意思不太好，求大神帮忙分析一下审稿意见，文章有希望么 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
今天系统多次维护，明天很可能放榜！
已经有5人回复
-
欢迎发来filecode的Mz6后的代码验证其规律
已经有74人回复
-
岩土工程学报什么时候才能终审完呐
已经有4人回复
-
时间戳又变了8-15
已经有25人回复
-
2027广东省杰青
已经有6人回复
-
快农历七夕节了，轻松一下，男人悄悄话，女施主请不要进来。
已经有3人回复
-
哪位老哥知道今年的国自然具体哪一天放榜？
已经有9人回复
-
咱们一起用铁证分析2026国家社科基金中标与否
已经有26人回复
-
我的国基提前知道中了，可是同事的操作让我实在接受不了，怎么会有这样的人
已经有16人回复
-
有时候，自然基金真的不能太认真 （我的申报经验）
已经有12人回复
|
本帖内容被屏蔽 |
3楼2017-04-17 14:07:40
eiri
新虫 (知名作家)
- 应助: 84 (初中生)
- 金币: 7620.3
- 散金: 3915
- 红花: 85
- 帖子: 8708
- 在线: 436.1小时
- 虫号: 4209911
- 注册: 2015-11-10
- 专业: 微观经济学
2楼2017-04-17 13:30:29
25