24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
查看: 912  |  回复: 3

feifei19810812

金虫 (职业作家)

[求助] 这样的情况能否argue, 头疼呀,可能是我们没有写好.........

就这一条,被干掉了,一年的辛苦努力呀,谢谢呀;

怎样argue呢?没弄过,请教ing

Referee 1:

Importance: C) important

Hypotheses Yes/No: Yes

Appropriate Length: Yes

Different Journal: ChemBioChem or ChemMedChem

Recommend Acceptance: D) No

Referee Letter: The authors present a study ......There are already many reports in literature that nanomaterials (particles, rods, cages) are promising in cancer therapy. The search for successful materials continues constantly. The new study is sound and thorough work but it does not present sufficient novelty in terms of methodology or significance in terms of the problem addressed to be considered for publication in Angewandte Chemie. Taking into account the rules for referees, I would put the manuscript in the category ¿important¿. A biochemical or biomedical Journal, e.g., ChemBioChem or ChemMedChem, would be much more appropriate.
回复此楼

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐,对您同样有帮助:

Persist
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

mlanqiang

木虫之王 (文学泰斗)

蓝博士

【答案】应助回帖

feifei19810812(金币+3): 好的 2011-11-06 09:38:19
feifei19810812(金币+1): 2011-11-06 09:49:37
feifei19810812(金币+43): hao 2011-11-06 10:49:08
祝福吧,再改投其他杂志吧。
蓝精灵
2楼2011-11-05 21:18:11
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

小牛哥

至尊木虫 (职业作家)

这个,基本上,很难。
3楼2011-11-05 23:00:08
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

seapass

至尊木虫 (职业作家)

超哥

优秀版主

【答案】应助回帖

feifei19810812(金币+3): 可能是我们写得不好 2011-11-06 09:48:30
有这个审稿意见:There are already many reports in literature。。。基本上很难了,因为创新性不够,文章的致命伤,改低一点的期刊试试吧,祝好运!
独上高楼。。。
4楼2011-11-05 23:10:02
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 feifei19810812 的主题更新
信息提示
请填处理意见