| 查看: 508 | 回复: 0 | |||
gululudeding新虫 (小有名气)
|
[交流]
编辑回信，共与各位前辈讨论
|
|
第一篇sci 终于有回信了， Reviewer: 1 Comments to the Author（修改后接受） See attached file. Reviewer: 2 Comments to the Author There are several asepcts that need to be improved: - the title is inadequate: If it is a review of non-surgical therapeutic strategies some alternative treatments are missing: bisphosphonates, iloprost (prostaglandin-analogon (J?ger et al)), hyperbar oxygen treatment, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, non-load weight bearing, Pulsed electromagnetic fields stimulation (Ding et al. ...) - THus, the result of literature research of these treatments need to be added; or at least some part of them as long as the title will be changed to e.g. pharmaceutical strategies - THe structure of the manuscript need to be improved: It should be organised in INtroduction, M&M, Results, Discussion. After M&M there is no further structure by heading. - The language needs to be improved. There are many very long sentences. In addition spelling should be checked. - The literature research is incomplete. E.g. Floerkemeier et al. (bone turnover markers failed to predict ....). The literature research needs to be completed. Detailed: - after introduction of the abbreviation SONFH it should be used througout the manuscript - page 1; first paragraph of introduction: “what′s“ is not written english - please add literature for the statement of the second paragraph of the introduction (multifactorial biomarkers) - protein-to protein (PPI) – here a word is missing - page 1: 3rd paragraph of introduction: Various non-surgical (of is too much). - Check spaces after commata and before brackets. - Literature should be mentioned at the end of the sentence unless the author′s name is mentioned. Reviewer: 3 Comments to the Author 1. There are not more outstanding insights of this review than that of related reviews. 2. The title of this review is too big. A profound review for biomarkers related to SONFH pathogenesis and non-surgical therapeutic strategies will be difficult. 结果会怎样？谢谢各位了 |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有14人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有15人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有13人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8O.55.1.O.5.4,科目齐全,可+急
已经有11人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8O5.5.1.O5.4,科目全,可伽急
已经有10人回复
-
售SCI文章，我:8O5.5.1.O.54,科目齐全,可+急
已经有20人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.54,科目齐全,可伽急
已经有17人回复
-
售SCI一区T0P文章，我:8.O.55.1.O.5.4,科目全,可+急
已经有5人回复
-
售SCI一区文章，我:8O5.5.1.O5.4,科目全,可伽急
已经有3人回复
-
售一区SCI文章T0P，我:8O.551.O54,科目全,可十急
已经有3人回复
找到一些相关的精华帖子，希望有用哦~
CEJ小修 审稿意见看不懂
已经有8人回复
- Bioresource Technology编辑意见求助
已经有14人回复
- 这种情况重投还有希望吗？
已经有9人回复
- 请诸位小木虫的高手帮忙鉴定一下这封编辑回信是什么意思，有修改后接受的意思吗
已经有13人回复
- SCI投稿过程总结
已经有124人回复
- 给导师的第一封信
已经有4人回复
- 第一次投sci，大家帮我看看这样的初审意见有希望吗
已经有22人回复
- 关于博导选择，各位给指点指点
已经有24人回复
- 收到 Revise Before Review
已经有6人回复
- SCI审稿意见求助，各位帮忙看看，是啥意思？该怎么修改？急！
已经有21人回复
- 怎么回复reviewer comments
已经有16人回复
- Information sciences的审稿流程请教
已经有5人回复
- 第一次投国内核心期刊，被退稿。。。悲催。。
已经有85人回复
- BT第一次收到编辑回信，不知道是否有希望？我还用回信吗？
已经有18人回复
- 导师回信，帮忙看看什么意思？
已经有8人回复
- 论文被拒后根据审稿人的意见修改后重新投该期刊的问题
已经有16人回复
- 给国外作者写信
已经有8人回复
- 麻烦虫友们帮忙看看这个简单的henry反应吧！
已经有9人回复
- 【原创】一个教授回信了，请大家帮我看一下是什么意思，谢谢！
已经有61人回复
- 求教Journal Manager的回信内容
已经有6人回复
点击这里搜索更多相关资源科研从小木虫开始，人人为我，我为人人
