| 查看: 1232 | 回复: 3 | ||
| 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 | ||
nakerunner金虫 (小有名气)
|
[求助]
Analtica Chimica Acta的editor两次叫重投，怪哉
|
|
|
前段时间投了Analtica Chimica Acta一篇，三个reviewers，其中一个拒绝，理由是创新性不足。其余两个大修。于是大修哉，后面两个接受，但是第一个reviewer依然拒绝，说里面问题很多，列出了30多个问题，并且有的问题我觉得他的意见并不正确，最后editor决策不下，只好给rejected了。但是建议重投（具体内容见下） 重投后，本以为会还reviewer的，结果只是editor换了，但是还是到原来那个reviewer那里，并另外加了一个reviewer，审稿1个月，Reviews required completed 持续了15天，当时猜测是reviewer意见不一致。最终果不其然，editor再次rejected了，并且说文章按照reviewer意见修改后可以发表，建议重投。两个reviwer一个小修，原来那个reviewer仍然拒绝，还说我没有完全按照他的要求改，我想的是当时要重投，就没必要完全按照point-to-point改了。 现在的问题是：我是否需要修改后重投，如果重投，是否还是原来那个据我那个reviewer审稿，如果还是那个，估计我的文章凶多吉少。 因为editor没有要求期限，能否先投别的杂志试一下，如果中了就算了，不中再按照reviewer意见改了重投？ 现在附上两次editor意见： 第一次: Dear Dr......, On behalf of the editor handling your manuscript, I am writing to you in reference to your manuscript entitled:........ On the basis of the review(s) appended below, we regret that your manuscript cannot be accepted in its present form for publication in ACA. However, it is the opinion of the Editor that there is potential merit in the work described and that a thorough consideration of the reviewer comments might result in a publishable paper. We would therefore be willing to consider a new manuscript that describes this work. Since this will be considered as a new submittal, it can be submitted online at any future time. In such a case, in the cover letter please address the prior comments of the reviewers, detailing what changes have been made. Thank you for your interest in Analytica Chimica Acta. Yours sincerely, Tanya Devanny Journal Manager Analytica Chimica Acta E-mail: aca@elsevier.com Reviewers' comments: Dear Dr ......, As you will see below the revised version of your manuscript still has numerous shortcomings not the least of which is a problem with novelty. Thus I must regrettably decline its publication. If you intend to re-submit this study I would strongly urge you to consider all of the comments made by the reviewers especially those related to novelty and language quality. Sincerely Neil Barnett Editor Reviewer #2: I thank the authors for their appreciation concerning the comments made. However, the revised manuscript has still many problems and it is not in a condition appropriate for publication. Some parts have been improved in terms of language. Others have been made very confusing or do not make sense (e.g., the description of the antibody coupling to ....). Concerning the novelty of the work I cannot agree with the authors' opinion. They wrote an extended response to the objection which, however, was not included in the manuscript to support its novelty. The references that they used in their answer are quite old (most of them dated back to 1985). Several problems related to ....., mentioned in these papers, have been solved or surpassed over the years. In any case, as I wrote above the manuscript is not appropriate for publication. Possibly, it could be decreased considerably in length and be presented as a technical note, focusing solely on the two-step assay. Below I have listed some of my objections and questions that could be taken into account in case that the authors would like to revise it. 第二次： Dear Dr. ........, On behalf of the editor handling your manuscript, I am writing to you in reference to your manuscript entitled:........ On the basis of the review(s) appended below, we regret that your manuscript cannot be accepted in its present form for publication in ACA. However, it is the opinion of the Editor that there is potential merit in the work described and that a thorough consideration of the reviewer comments might result in a publishable paper. We would therefore be willing to consider a new manuscript that describes this work. Since this will be considered as a new submittal, it can be submitted online at any future time. In such a case, in the cover letter please address the prior comments of the reviewers, detailing what changes have been made. Thank you for your interest in Analytica Chimica Acta. Yours sincerely, Tanya Devanny Journal Manager Analytica Chimica Acta E-mail: aca@elsevier.com Reviewers' comments: Dear Dr ......., Clearly Reviewer #2 is still unsupportive of your manuscript an my reading of it backs up his criticisms. Sincerely Editor Reviewer #1: The manuscript describes two approaches for the detection of C-reactive protein (CRP) using antibody conjugated quantum dots. The approaches are sensitive and selective. Practicality of the two approaches is no doubt. 1. ....... 2. ....... 3. ........ Reviewer #2: In this (third) revised version of the manuscript the authors replied to 21 out of 31 specific comments that I had made. In addition, they did not responded at all to the introductory statement of the review and they did not provide a response letter listing the exact changes they made in response to the review. I consider that the manuscript has considerable problems, especially in the methods description and again the right axis of Fig.2B is wrong. Therefore I suggest rejection of the manuscript. [ Last edited by nakerunner on 2011-5-30 at 23:42 ] |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的？
已经有17人回复
-
国自然面上复盘~欢迎讨论
已经有6人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.551.O.5.4,科目全,可伽急
已经有4人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有4人回复
-
基金不中，共勉
已经有5人回复
-
看板上这么多中的，有点像50人群里49个人都是骗子的那种感觉……
已经有3人回复
-
我不理解！
已经有23人回复
-
2026年的国家社科基金项目通讯评审的新规则与新动向、新挑战
已经有10人回复
-
系统查不到
已经有10人回复
-
怎么查啊
已经有5人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 这个是算大修还是算重投？
已经有8人回复
- 教你如何使用代理下载文献，从此下载文献不用愁，想学的赶紧进来看吧
已经有63人回复
- JOSA A 论文审稿结束一周，编辑未给结论
已经有10人回复
- 投稿两次被soft rejected，怎么办？
已经有9人回复
- acta E 真的被SCI踢了吗？
已经有37人回复
- acta mater under review 3 个多月了，期间的一点小经验
已经有5人回复
- 关于Electrochimica Acta的投稿格式问题
已经有20人回复
- acta e死了我们好无语
已经有8人回复
- 投Analytica Chimica Acta后的状态让人费解
已经有35人回复
- 各位大侠，小弟向《中国药学杂志》投了一篇综述，小弟有几个问题请教，重金答谢！
已经有17人回复
- 投了ACTA，返回大修，审稿人问到数据重现性的问题，如何回答？
已经有7人回复
- Microchim Acta杂志状态一直保持with editor差不多十天了，是不是很可能被拒啊？急！
已经有10人回复
- MSEA，编辑套话让改语言，10天后改好重投通过，但with editor一周多了还没送审？
已经有34人回复
- 投Acta Mater 一个星期悲剧了，内心凄凉中~~~
已经有9人回复
yensh
金虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 贵宾: 7.448
- 金币: 2333.1
- 散金: 18967
- 红花: 118
- 沙发: 677
- 帖子: 25063
- 在线: 1871.6小时
- 虫号: 446925
- 注册: 2007-10-28
- 专业: 未来学
3楼2011-05-31 21:20:28
4楼2019-04-02 20:34:02
投票: