| 查看: 443 | 回复: 0 | |||
| 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 | |||
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 |
» 猜你喜欢
论文终于录用啦!满足毕业条件了
已经有21人回复
不自信的我
已经有5人回复
磺酰氟产物,毕不了业了!
已经有4人回复
投稿Elsevier的杂志(返修),总是在选择OA和subscription界面被踢皮球
已经有8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
科研从小木虫开始,人人为我,我为人人







回复此楼
点击这里搜索更多相关资源