| 查看: 833 | 回复: 1 | ||
xiaoze2003铜虫 (小有名气)
|
[求助]
reviewer在对文章进行详细评述之前，说了一段话，在response中要回应吗？ 已有1人参与
|
|
reviewer在对文章进行详细评述之前，说了一段评述性意见，在response中要回应吗？ 原文如下： Before delving into the paper in detail, I think a few broad concepts need to be revised. First, it should be made clearer that this procedure is only being offered in male patients. Second, my definitions and your definitions of the terms hernia, hydrocele, and patent processus vaginalis seem to be different. You need to clearly define these entities. In my practice, I repair all male pediatric inguinal hernias via a similar laparoscopic approach, but I offer the traditional high-ligation/hydrocelectomy for non-communicating hydroceles that require intervention. It seems as though this paper defines communicating hydroceles and inguinal hernias as the same. That should be better clarified, as it is confusing, and these changes should be reflected throughout the abstract and manuscript. Third, in my practice I do not separate these cases into complicated vs non-complicated based on the number of peritoneal folds. Additionally, throughout the manuscript there is no mention of creating scar to the anterior ring, a concept I find critical in the durability of minimally invasive approaches. And lastly, throughout the abstract and manuscript there is reference to the "standard laparoscopic approach". As of yet, a standard laparoscopic approach does not exist, and it is instead data such as yours that will help us further define the optimal minimally invasive approach to inguinal hernia repair in pediatric males. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
284求调剂
已经有10人回复
-
一志愿山东大学药学学硕求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
07化学280分求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
298-一志愿中国农业大学-求调剂
已经有12人回复
-
求材料，环境专业调剂
已经有3人回复
-
335求调剂
已经有5人回复
-
求调剂
已经有7人回复
-
一志愿吉大化学322求调剂
已经有4人回复
-
环境学硕288求调剂
已经有8人回复
-
341求调剂(一志愿湖南大学070300)
已经有6人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
2楼2014-12-15 23:24:32
