| 查看: 3357 | 回复: 14 | ||
| 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 | ||
qinger1110铜虫 (小有名气)
|
[求助]
文章被completely-rejected了，准备重拾信心，再resubmited！ 已有3人参与
|
|
|
编辑来信如下： Thanks for sending your paper to****. Because of an overwhelming influx of manuscripts (more than 3800 per year), about 5 times more than space in the journal, we have a policy in which the editors make a first judgment based on criteria such as out of scope, too preliminary, too sloppy or very poor language, and decide whether the paper will enter the review procedure or will be returned right away. We believe that this is best for all parties, for the authors as they have a rapid answer, for the referees as we all know that we are overloaded with requests for reviewing papers, which is a threat for the quality of the reviewing system. To make these criteria more clear we have adapted the "Rules of 5" which have been published in the journal and can be found on the JEP website ****. It will help you to see what criteria we are using for our first screening. Of course if you can answer the raised questions, it is always possible to resubmit, but please check if you have the right format for abstract (structured!) and the references. I have read your paper but before it can be subject to review it must fit the "Rules of 5" which are not met on the following criteria: Full botanical plant names, including authorities, must be mentioned besides the local names and if existing, an English name(see K. Chan, et al. (2012) Good practice in reviewing and publishing studies on herbal medicine, with special emphasis on traditional Chinese medicine and Chinese Materia Medica. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 140: 469-475, this is open access so you can get this paper for free from the journals website). Please check also if your plant name corresponds to the latest revision in "The Plant List" (www.theplantlist.org ). A clear verifiable scientific reference to the traditional use. E.g. mentioning that some traditional healers make such claims, or that just saying that it is a well known traditional medicine is not sufficient. Moreover that a plant is used medicinally is not sufficient, the effect studied should be related to the traditional use. Just mentioning an anecdotal report is not sufficient, there must be a clear published scientific observation obtained in a study following (inter)nationally accepted rules, as such observations may interfere with the IP rights of the indigenous people. For further assistance, please visit our customer support site at http://help.elsevier.com/app/answers/list/p/7923. Here you can search for solutions on a range of topics, find answers to frequently asked questions and learn more about EES via interactive tutorials. You will also find our 24/7 support contact details should you need any further assistance from one of our customer support representatives. 请问这样被拒再重新投稿，成功概率大吗？？？ 小女子都二年级了，迫切需要发文章毕业啊！ |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
面上函评意见出来了，像什么等级？
已经有17人回复
-
为什么国自然不能直接公布
已经有5人回复
-
梦想
已经有7人回复
-
学科评审组评审是指会评吗？
已经有4人回复
-
面上合作单位盖章
已经有8人回复
-
为什么资助数各大高校都创新高，自己申请怎么就这么难
已经有14人回复
-
小白求助 投论文要求的highlights应该如何写
已经有4人回复
-
麻烦专家们看看评委们的意见（F口面上）
已经有12人回复
-
怎么看青基中了没有啊
已经有6人回复
-
国社科又开始会评了，不知道这次命运如何
已经有11人回复
10楼2015-03-08 12:51:09
yangwg8088
铜虫 (著名写手)
- 应助: 503 (博士)
- 金币: 12425.5
- 散金: 184
- 红花: 24
- 帖子: 2421
- 在线: 736.5小时
- 虫号: 2419974
- 注册: 2013-04-16
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 常微分方程与动力系统
2楼2014-05-04 12:13:59
3楼2014-05-04 12:56:06
qinger1110
铜虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 312.4
- 红花: 17
- 帖子: 163
- 在线: 55.5小时
- 虫号: 1129163
- 注册: 2010-10-22
- 专业: 中药质量评价
4楼2014-05-09 10:03:40
投票:
30