| 查看: 20062 | 回复: 614 | |||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | |||
| 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 | |||
[资源]
SCI投稿信件的一些套话 整理收藏 ：）
|
|||
|
一、投稿信 1. Dear Dr. Defendi ML: I am sending a manuscript entitled “” by – which I should like to submit for possible publication in the journal of - . Yours sincerely 2. Dear Dr. A: Enclosed is a manuscript entitled “” by sb, which we are submitting for publication in the journal of - . We have chosen this journal because it deals with - . We believe that sth would be of interest to the journal’s readers. 3. Dear Dr. A: Please find enclosed for your review an original research article, “” by sb. All authors have read and approve this version of the article, and due care has been taken to ensure the integrity of the work. No part of this paper has published or submitted elsewhere. No conflict of interest exits in the submission of this manuscript, and we have attached to this letter the signed letter granting us permission to use Figure 1 from another source. We appreciate your consideration of our manuscript, and we look forward to receiving comments from the reviewers. 二、询问有无收到稿件 Dear Editors, We dispatched our manuscript to your journal on 3 August 2006 but have not, as yet, receive acknowledgement of their safe arrival. We fear that may have been lost and should be grateful if you would let us know whether or not you have received them. If not, we will send our manuscript again. Thank you in advance for your help. 三、询问论文审查回音 Dear Editors， It is more than 12 weeks since I submitted our manuscript (No: ) for possible publication in your journal. I have not yet received a reply and am wondering whether you have reached a decision. I should appreciated your letting me know what you have decided as soon as possible. 四、关于论文的总体审查意见 1. This is a carefully done study and the findings are of considerable interest. A few minor revision are list below. 2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benefit of the reader, however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justification. There are given below. 3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of the subject sufficiently to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as – 4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added. 5. This manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal of – because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - . 6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory. 7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker. 8. The wording and style of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined. 9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays. 10. The condition of incubation are poorly defined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used? 五、给编辑的回信 1. In reply to the referee’s main criticism of paper, it is possible to say that – One minor point raised by the referee concerns of the extra composition of the reaction mixture in Figure 1. This has now been corrected. Further minor changes had been made on page 3, paragraph 1 (line 3-8) and 2 (line 6-11). These do not affect our interpretation of the result. 2. I have read the referee’s comments very carefully and conclude that the paper has been rejected on the sole grounds that it lake toxicity data. I admit that I did not include a toxicity table in my article although perhaps I should have done. This was for the sake of brevity rather than an error or omission. 3. Thank you for your letter of – and for the referee’s comments concerning our manuscript entitled “”. We have studied their comments carefully and have made correction which we hope meet with their approval. 4. I enclosed a revised manuscript which includes a report of additional experiments done at the referee’s suggestion. You will see that our original findings are confirmed. 5. We are sending the revised manuscript according to the comments of the reviewers. Revised portion are underlined in red. 6. We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the manuscript 7. We are pleased to note the favorable comments of reviewers in their opening sentence. 8. Thank you for your letter. I am very pleased to learn that our manuscript is acceptable for publication in Cancer Research with minor revision. 9. We have therefore completed a further series of experiments, the result of which are summarized in Table 5. From this we conclude that intrinsic factor is not account. 10. We deleted the relevant passage since they are not essential to the contents of the paper. 11. I feel that the reviewer’s comments concerning Figures 1 and 2 result from a misinterpretation of the data. 12. We would have include a non-protein inhibitor in our system, as a control, if one had been available. 13. We prefer to retain the use of Table 4 for reasons that it should be clear from the new paragraph inserted at the end of the Results section. 14. Although reviewer does not consider it is important to measure the temperature of the cells, we consider it essential. 15. The running title has been changed to “”. 16. The Materials and Methods section now includes details for measuring uptake of isotope and assaying hexokinase. 17. The concentration of HAT media (page12 paragraph 2) was incorrectly stated in the original manuscript. This has been rectified. The authors are grateful to the referees for pointing out their error. 18. As suggested by both referees, a discussion of the possibility of laser action on chromosome has been included (page16, paragraph 2). 19. We included a new set of photographs with better definition than those originally submitted and to which a scale has been added. 20. Following the suggestion of the referees, we have redraw Figure 3 and 4. 21. Two further papers, published since our original submission, have been added to the text and Reference section. These are: 22. We should like to thank the referees for their helpful comments and hope that we have now produced a more balance and better account of our work. We trust that the revised manuscript is acceptable for publication. 23. I greatly appreciate both your help and that of the referees concerning improvement to this paper. I hope that the revised manuscript is now suitable for publication. 24. I should like to express my appreciation to you and the referees for suggesting how to improve our paper. 25. I apologize for the delay in revising the manuscript. This was due to our doing an additional experiment, as suggested by referees. 看完此帖，复制粘贴此帖的同时，请给兄弟俺评价【有★就行】，谢谢  你们的回帖是我发帖的动力！！ [ Last edited by andyfu125 on 2007-10-8 at 12:02 ] |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
投稿精细化工
已经有6人回复
-
博士读完未来一定会好吗
已经有36人回复
-
之前让一硕士生水了7个发明专利，现在这7个获批发明专利的维护费可从哪儿支出哈？
已经有10人回复
-
博士申请都是内定的吗？
已经有9人回复
-
心脉受损
已经有8人回复
-
读博
已经有5人回复
聚焦药品研发注册 阐述精辟独到见解聚焦药品研发注册 阐述精辟独到见解
|
聚焦药品研发注册 阐述精辟独到见解 ——中国药科大学国际医药商学院第三届研究生论坛征文通知 值此医药行业大浪淘沙、医疗卫生体制改革波澜壮阔之时，我院研究生会拟于07年12月初举办第三届研究生论坛。届时将会邀请业内知名专家来宁讲座，涵盖企业、高校及政府部门等，同时我们也会面向社会征稿。现将征文有关事宜通知如下： 一、征文内容 研究创新是我国医药产业持续发展的必经之路，探讨创新的模式等各个方面有着重大的意义。在新《药品注册管理办法》即将出台之际，探讨药品研究创新的问题，为协助我国药品研发找寻新的促长点以促进我国医药事业的发展，具有积极的现实意义。 来稿可以围绕我国医药行业“药品研发与创新”这一主题，可从多个角度，全方位（如企业、政府、高校等）进行研讨。诸如：新药研发的宏观环境，新药研发的模式（如CRO的盛行），新药研发的国际趋势，新药研发中其他学科的运用（如药物经济学、运筹学、风险管理等等），新药的临床试验，新药的注册管理等，凡是关于新药研发的内容均可畅所欲言。 二、征文要求 来稿要求具有科学性、严谨性、创造性，并对实践有指导意义。文稿形式上依次包括题名、作者姓名、中文摘要（200字左右为宜）、关键词（3-5个）、正文、参考文献。 来稿请在文稿第一页下方注明作者，著录格式如下：作者：姓名，单位，联系方式。 三 截稿日期 2007年11月5日 四 评选 论坛由资深专家审稿，评选出一等奖2名，二等奖4名，三等奖6名，鼓励奖若干名，奖品丰厚。外地一等奖获得者将由论坛邀请至南京参加论坛的全过程。 五、其它投稿须知 文章的发表权均可由作者保留。 以前发表过的与本次征文主题相关的文章也可参与论坛。 六、网络平台 为加强与外部的联络与沟通，利用现代网络广覆盖、多层次的优势，我会将与药学网络平台——药联盟开展合作，并将开辟新的板块，具体内容我们将陆续发布，并将在药联盟板块上持续报道论坛的情况，敬请关注。 药联盟网址：http://www.ulam.cn/Group/55.shtml； 七、联系方式 投稿邮箱：syyh2007@hotmail.com，fedora_ren@163.com 咨询电话：任正华 13512535548 QQ号：158161656 欢迎踊跃投稿！ 中国药科大学国际医药商学院 2007.9.29 |
88楼2007-09-30 10:58:47
2楼2007-09-20 17:55:24
3楼2007-09-20 18:12:26
4楼2007-09-20 18:27:28