[交流] 审稿人第一次的意见发错了，撤回重评。请各位大侠看看新的意见，有戏么？ 已有2人参与

文章3月17号投的，中间发邮件给编辑问了几次，7月26号一审意见才回来。从系统里看，审稿人1在4月18号就给了意见，意见中肯、口气也比较客气；但审稿人2给的意见根本不是针对我的文章，只好发邮件询问编辑。这次杂志很快回我，说“已经告知审稿人2在给意见时存在问题，要求尽快给出意见。”1周后，也就是今天，审稿人2的意见回来，读起来不容乐观，发出来请各位大侠看看，文章还有戏不？ 1.Please highlight the limitations and strengths.： The main limitation of the study is the small sample size (no justification is provided on the sample size calculation) that limits the possibility to generalize the findings and stratify the BP group based on medications used. Moreover, it is not clear if only Bipolar I were included in the study and which mood status was the pt experiencing at the time of the study. finally, the authors did not provide a complete description of the emotional picture session and do not explore any effects of the same on the reward circuit, relevant for both facial and pain processing. 2.Are there objective errors in the methods or results, and are the conclusions supported by the presented data? As reported before, no sample size justification and no description of the task used are reported. Moreover, a description of the BP sample is warranted (current phase of illness, duration of illness and number of episodes, BP I or II, etc). Overall, a more detailed description of methods and study population is suggested 3.Please provide your detailed review report to the editors and authors: A development of the method section (statistical analysis, sample size justification, description of measure, fMRI and study population) is recommended. I suggest also to include an overview on pain sensitivity in MDD and explore the effect of facial recognition and pain sensitivity in the contest of the reward system. 各位的任何经验都对我很有帮助，先谢谢啦！

回复此楼