| 查看: 916 | 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
40+中年人失业后，还能找到好工作吗？
已经有12人回复
-
用NBS溴化时溶剂除了CCl4外还有什么
已经有6人回复
-
申请科研项目纯靠实力能成功吗？
已经有11人回复
-
极限拉扯，如何抉择
已经有15人回复
-
二审4个多月了还是Awaiting Reviewer Scores
已经有4人回复
-
OpenAI又攻克数学难题了，离AI做有机合成还有多远？
已经有13人回复
-
课题组会帮你通过考核么？
已经有7人回复
-
售一区SCI文章T0P，我:8O.551.O54,科目全,可十急
已经有9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一区T0P文章，我:8.O55.1.O.54,科目全,可十急
已经有8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
200