回復(fù)審稿人的回信技巧

1、SCI答復(fù)審稿人的回信技巧一篇稿子從醞釀到成型歷經(jīng)艱辛，投出去之后又是漫長(zhǎng)的等待，好容易收到編輯的回信，得到的往往又是審稿人不留情面的一頓狂批。這時(shí)候，如何有策略有技巧的回復(fù)審稿人就顯得尤為重要。好的回復(fù)是文章被接收的重要砝碼，而不恰當(dāng)?shù)幕貜?fù)輕則導(dǎo)致再次修改從而拖延發(fā)稿時(shí)間，重則導(dǎo)致文章被拒，前功盡棄。下面把我平時(shí)總結(jié)的一些答復(fù)審稿人的策略和寫回復(fù)信的格式和技巧跟大家交流一下。首先，絕對(duì)服從編輯的意見。在審稿人給出各自的意見之后，編輯一般不會(huì)再提出自己的意見。但是，編輯一旦提出某些意見，就意味著他認(rèn)為這是文章里的重大缺陷，至少是不合他的口味。這時(shí)，我們唯一能夠做的只能是服從。因?yàn)楫吘故侨思艺莆?/p>

2、著生殺予奪的大權(quán)。第二，永遠(yuǎn)不要跟審稿人爭(zhēng)執(zhí)。跟審稿人起爭(zhēng)執(zhí)是非常不明智的一件事情。審稿人意見如果正確那就不用說了，直接照辦就是。如果不正確的話，也大可不必在回復(fù)中冷嘲熱諷，心平氣和的說明白就是了。大家都是青年人，血?dú)夥絼偅蝗伺牧水?dāng)然不爽，被人錯(cuò)拍了就更不爽了。尤其是一些名門正派里的弟子，看到一審結(jié)果是major而不是minor本來就已經(jīng)很不爽了，難得抓住審稿人的尾巴，恨不得拖出來打死。有次審稿，一個(gè)審稿人給的意見是增加兩篇參考文獻(xiàn)（估計(jì)也就是審稿人自己的文章啦），結(jié)果作者在回復(fù)中寫到，making a reference is not charity！看到之后我當(dāng)時(shí)就笑噴了，可以想象審稿人

3、得被噎成什么樣。正如大家所想的那樣，這篇稿子理所當(dāng)然的被拒了，雖然后來經(jīng)編輯調(diào)解改成了major revision，但畢竟耽誤的是作者自己的時(shí)間不是？第三，合理掌握修改和argue的分寸。所謂修改就是對(duì)文章內(nèi)容進(jìn)行的修改和補(bǔ)充，所謂argue就是在回復(fù)信中對(duì)審稿人的答復(fù)。這其中大有文章可做，中心思想就是容易改的照改，不容易改的或者不想改的跟審稿人argue。對(duì)于語法、拼寫錯(cuò)誤、某些詞匯的更換、對(duì)某些公式和圖表做進(jìn)一步解釋等相對(duì)容易做到的修改，一定要一毫不差的根據(jù)審稿意見照做。而對(duì)于新意不足、創(chuàng)新性不夠這類根本沒法改的，還有諸如跟算法A，B，C，D做比較，補(bǔ)充大量實(shí)驗(yàn)等短時(shí)間內(nèi)根本沒法完成的任務(wù)

4、，我們則要有理有據(jù)的argue。在Argue的時(shí)候首先要肯定審稿人說的很對(duì)，他提出的方法也很好，但本文的重點(diǎn)是blablabla，跟他說的不是一回事。然后為了表示對(duì)審稿人的尊重，象征性的在文中加上一段這方面的discussion，這樣既照顧到了審稿人的面子，編輯那也能交待的過去。第四，聰明的掌握修改時(shí)間。拿到審稿意見，如果是minor，意見只有寥寥數(shù)行，那當(dāng)然會(huì)情不自禁的一蹴而就，一天甚至幾小時(shí)搞定修改稿。這時(shí)候，問題在于要不要馬上投回去了？我的意見是放一放，多看一看，兩個(gè)星期之后再投出去。這樣首先避免了由于大喜過望而沒能及時(shí)檢查出的小毛病，還不會(huì)讓編輯覺得你是在敷衍他。如果結(jié)果是major，

5、建議至少放一個(gè)月再投出去，顯得比較鄭重。上面是一些一般性的答復(fù)審稿人的策略，在實(shí)際中的應(yīng)用還需要大家見仁見智。下面談?wù)劥饛?fù)信的寫法。寫答復(fù)信的唯一目的是讓編輯和審稿人一目了然的知道我們做了哪些修改。因此，所有的格式和寫法都要圍繞這一目的。一般來說可以把答復(fù)信分成三部分，即List of Actions, Responses to Editor, Responses to Reviewers。第一部分List of Actions的作用是簡(jiǎn)明扼要的列出所有修改的條目，讓編輯和審稿人在第一時(shí)間對(duì)修改量有個(gè)概念，同時(shí)它還充當(dāng)著修改目錄的作用，詳見下面的例子。剩下的兩部分是分別對(duì)編輯和審稿人所做的答復(fù)

6、，格式可以一樣，按照“意見”“argue”（如果有的話）“修改”這樣逐條進(jìn)行。清楚醒目起見，可以用不同字體分別標(biāo)出，比如“意見”用italic，“argue”正常字體，“修改”用bold。下面舉例說明各部分的寫法和格式。編輯意見：請(qǐng)?jiān)谛薷母逯杏秒p倍行距。審稿人1：意見1：置疑文章的創(chuàng)新性，提出相似的工作已經(jīng)被A和B做過。意見2：算法表述不明確。意見3：對(duì)圖3的圖例應(yīng)做出解釋。審稿人2：意見1：圖2太小。意見2：第3頁有個(gè)錯(cuò)別字。很顯然，根據(jù)上面的答復(fù)策略，我們準(zhǔn)備對(duì)除1號(hào)審稿人意見1之外的所有意見進(jìn)行相應(yīng)改動(dòng)，而對(duì)1.1采取argue為主的策略。答復(fù)如下：List of ActionsLOA1

7、: The revised manuscript is double spaced.LOA2: A discussion on novelty of this work and a comparison with A and B have been added in page 3.LOA3: A paragraph has been added in page 5 to further explain the algorithm *.LOA4: Explanations of the legend of Figure 3 have been added in page 7.LOA5: Figu

8、re 2 has been enlarged.LOA6: All typos have been removed.=分頁=Responses to Editor請(qǐng)?jiān)谛薷母逯杏秒p倍行距。We have double spaced the text throughout the revised manuscript, see LOA1.=分頁=Responses to ReviewersTo Reviewer 1:意見1：置疑文章的創(chuàng)新性，提出相似的工作已經(jīng)被A和B做過。Thank you for pointing this out. A and Bs research groups have d

9、one blablablabla. However, the focus of our work is on blablablabla, which is very different from A and Bs work, and this is also the major contribution of our work. We have added the following discussion on this issue in our revised manuscript, see LOA2.“blablablabla(此處把A和B的工作做一個(gè)review，并提出自己工作和他們的區(qū)

10、別之處)”意見2：算法表述不明確。We have added the following discussion to further explain algorithm *, see LOA3.“blablablabla（此處進(jìn)一步解釋該算法）”意見3：對(duì)圖3的圖例應(yīng)做出解釋。We have added the following explanations of the legend of Figure 3, see LOA3.“blablablabla（圖3圖例的解釋）”=分頁=To Reviewer 2:意見1：圖2太小。We have enlarged Figure 2, see LOA

11、 4.意見2：第3頁有個(gè)錯(cuò)別字。We have removed all typos, see LOA5.=分頁=總之，寫答復(fù)信的宗旨就是用最少的時(shí)間和工作量達(dá)到論文被接收的目的。這里權(quán)當(dāng)是拋磚引玉，希望和大家多多交流。 來源：pitlord999小木蟲如何回復(fù)SCI投稿審稿人意見如何回復(fù)SCI投稿審稿人意見(1) 1.所有問題必須逐條回答。2.盡量滿足意見中需要補(bǔ)充的實(shí)驗(yàn)。3.滿足不了的也不要回避，說明不能做的合理理由。4.審稿人推薦的文獻(xiàn)一定要引用，并討論透徹。以下是本人對(duì)審稿人意見的回復(fù)一例，僅供參考。續(xù)兩點(diǎn)經(jīng)驗(yàn)：1，最重要的是逐條回答，即使你答不了，也要老實(shí)交代；不要

12、太狡猾，以至于耽誤事；2，絕大部分實(shí)驗(yàn)是不要真追加的，除非你受到啟發(fā)，而想該投另外高檔雜志-因?yàn)槟慵热灰呀?jīng)寫成文章，從邏輯上肯定是一個(gè)完整的 “story” 了。以上指國(guó)際雜志修稿。國(guó)內(nèi)雜志太多，以至于稿源吃緊，基本沒有退稿，所以你怎么修都是接受。我的文章水平都不高，主要是沒有明顯的創(chuàng)新性，也很苦惱。但是除了開始幾篇投在國(guó)內(nèi)雜志外，其他都在國(guó)際雜志（也都是SCI）發(fā)表。以我了解的情況，我單位其他同志給國(guó)內(nèi)雜志投稿，退稿的極少，只有一次被某某科學(xué)進(jìn)展拒絕。究其原因，除了我上面說的，另外可能是我單位寫稿子還是比較嚴(yán)肅，導(dǎo)師把關(guān)也比較嚴(yán)的緣故。自我感覺總結(jié)（不一定對(duì)）：1）國(guó)內(nèi)雜志審稿極慢（少數(shù)除外

13、），但現(xiàn)在也有加快趨勢(shì)；2）國(guó)內(nèi)雜志編輯人員認(rèn)真負(fù)責(zé)的人不多，稿子寄去后，少則幾個(gè)月，多則一年多沒有任何消息；3）國(guó)內(nèi)雜志要求修改的稿子，如果你自己不修，他最后也給你發(fā)；4）國(guó)外雜志要求補(bǔ)充實(shí)驗(yàn)的，我均以解釋而過關(guān)，原因見少帖）。還因?yàn)椋汉苌匐s志編輯把你的修改稿再寄給當(dāng)初審稿人的，除非審稿人特別請(qǐng)求。編輯不一定懂你的東西，他只是看到你認(rèn)真修改，回答疑問了，也就接受了（當(dāng)然高檔雜志可能不是這樣，我的經(jīng)驗(yàn)只限定一般雜志（影響因子1-5）。歡迎大家批評(píng)指正。我常用的回復(fù)格式，呵呵。Dear reviewer:I am very grateful to your comments for the ma

14、nuscript. According with your advice, we amended the relevant part in manuscript. Some of your questions were answered below.1）2）.引用審稿人推薦的文獻(xiàn)的確是很重要的，要想辦法和自己的文章有機(jī)地結(jié)合起來。至于實(shí)驗(yàn)大部分都可以不用補(bǔ)做，關(guān)鍵是你要讓審稿人明白你的文章的重點(diǎn)是什么，這個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)你要強(qiáng)調(diào)的重點(diǎn)內(nèi)容不是很必要，或者你現(xiàn)在所用的方法已經(jīng)可以達(dá)到目的就行了。最后要注意，審稿人也會(huì)犯錯(cuò)誤，不僅僅是筆誤也有專業(yè)知識(shí)上的錯(cuò)誤，因?yàn)榫庉嬚业膶徃迦宋幢厥悄氵@個(gè)領(lǐng)域的專家。只要

15、自己是正確的就要堅(jiān)持。在回復(fù)中委婉地表達(dá)一下你的意見，不過要注意商討語氣哦！我得回復(fù)格式是這樣的：Dear Professor xx:Thank you very much for your letter dated xxx xx xxxx, and the referees reports. Based on your comment and request, we have made extensive modification on the original manuscript. Here, we attached revised manuscript. in the formats

16、of both PDF and MS word, for your approval. A document answering every question from the referees was also summarized and enclosed. A revised manuscript. with the correction sections red marked was attached as the supplemental material and for easy check/editing purpose. Should you have any question

17、s, please contact us without hesitate.然后再附上Q/A，基本上囑條回答，寫的越多越好（老師語）。結(jié)果修改一次就接收了：）我的回復(fù)，請(qǐng)老外幫忙修改了Dear Editor:Thank you for your kind letter of “.” on November *, 2005. We revised the manuscript. in accordance with the reviewers comments, and carefully proof-read the manuscript. to minimize typographical,

18、 grammatical, and bibliographical errors.Here below is our description on revision according to the reviewers comments. Part A (Reviewer 1). The reviewers comment: .The authors Answer: .2. The reviewers comment: .The authors Answer: . Part B(Reviewer 2)1. The reviewers comment: .The authors Ans

19、wer: .2. The reviewers comment: .The authors Answer: .Many grammatical or typographical errors have been revised.All the lines and pages indicated above are in the revised manuscript.Thank you and all the reviewers for the kind advice.Sincerely yours,* 精華如何回復(fù)SCI投稿審稿人意見(2)  一個(gè)回復(fù)的例子(已接收

20、)Major comments:1. The authors need to strengthen their results by including MMP secretion, and tran-matrigel migration by a positive control progenitor cell population i.e. enriched human CD34 cells obtained from mobilized PBL, since this is a more clinically relevant source of CD34 cells which has

21、 also been shown to secrete both MMP-9 and MMP-2 (ref. 11). CD34 enriched cells from steady state peripheral blood which also secrete MMPs are also of interest.2. In fig1Cplease specify which cell line represents MMP-negative cells. This needs to be clarified, as well as a better explanation of the

22、method of the protocol.3. The ELISA results are represented as "fold increase" compared to control. Instead, we suggest that standards should be used and results should be presented as absolute concentrations and only then can these results be compared to those of the zymography.4. When di

23、scussing the results, the authors should distinguish clearly between spontaneous migration vs chemotactic migration.Furthermore, the high spontaneous migration obtained with cord blood CD34 cells should be compared to mobilized PBL CD34 enriched cells and discussed.5. The authors claim that the clon

24、ogenic assay was performed to determine the optimum concentration for inhibition of MMP activity by phenanthroline and anti MMP-9 mAb, however they should clarify that this assay can only determine the toxicity of the inhibitors and not their optimal inhibitory concentrations.Minor comments:1. There

25、 are many spelling and syntax errors, especially in the results and discussion, which need correction.a. Of special importance, is the percent inhibition of migration,which is described as percent of migration. i.e. pg 7:"Migration of CB CD34 was reduced to 73.3%?" Instead should read &quo

26、t;Migration of CB CD34 was reduced by 73.3%?"b. The degree symbol needs to be added to the numbers in Materials and methods.2. It would be preferable to combine figure1Aand B, in order to confirm the reliability of fig. 1B by a positive control (HT1080).Answer to referee 1 comment:1. Mobilized

27、peripheral blood is a more clinical source of CD34+ cells, so it is necessary to compare the MMP-9 secretion and trans-migration ability of CB CD34+ cells with that of mobilized PB CD34+ cells. However, we couldn't obtain enough mobilized PB to separate PB CD34+ cells and determine the MMP-9 sec

28、retion and migration ability, so we couldnt complement the study on PB CD34+ cells in this paper. Results obtained by Janowska-Wieczorek et al found that mobilized CD34+ cells in peripheral blood express MMP-9. Furthermore, Domenechs study showed that MMP-9 secretion is involved in G-CSF induced HPC

29、 mobilization. Their conclusions have been added in the discussion. In our present study, our central conclusion from our data is that freshly isolated CD34+ stem/progenitor cells obtained from CB produce MMP-9.2. MMP-9 negative cell used in fig1Cwas Jurkat cell. In zymographic analysis, MMP-9 was n

30、ot detected in the medium conditioned by Jurkat cell. To exclude that the contaminating cells may play a role in the observed MMP-9 production, we screened the media conditioned by different proportion of CB mononuclear cells with MMP-9 negative cells by zymography. This result may be confusion. Act

31、ually, only by detecting the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB mononuclear cells (MNC)/ml (since the purities of CD34+ cell are more than 90%), it could exclude the MNC role. In the revised manuscript, we only detected MMP-9 activity and antigen level in the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB mononuclear c

32、ells (MNC)/ml. There is no MMP-9 secretion be detected in the medium conditioned by 2X105 CB MNC/ml. It excluded the possibility that the MMP-9 activity in CB CD34+ cells conditioned medium is due to the contamination by MNC.3.In this revised paper, we have detected the MMP-9 antigen levels by using

33、 commercial specific ELISA kits (R&D System, sensitivity, 0.156ng/ml). Recombinant MMP-9 from R&D System was used as a standard. The results are expressed in the absolute concentration. The absolute concentration result has been added in the paper. As shown in Fig2, MMP-9 levels were detecta

34、ble in both CB CD34+ cell conditioned medium and BM CD34+ cell conditioned medium. However, MMP-9 level was significantly higher in CB CD34+ cell conditioned medium than in BM CD34+ cell conditioned medium (0.406±0.133ng/ml versus 0.195±0.023ng/ml). Although gelatinolytic activity was not

35、detected in media conditioned by CD34+ cells from BM, sensitivity of ELISA favors the detection of MMP-9 antigen in the BM CD34+.4. In our study, to establish the direct link between MMP-9 and CB CD34+ cells migration, we only determined the role of MMP-9 inspontaneous migration of CB CD34+ cells, b

36、ut not in chemotactic migration. Actually, regulation of hematopoietic stem cell migration, homing and anchorage of repopulation cells to the bone marrow involves a complex interplay between adhesion molecules, chemokines, cytokines and proteolytic enzymes. Results obtained by the groups of Voermans

37、 reveal that not only the spontaneous migration but also the SDF-1 induced migration of CB CD34+ cells is greatly increased in comparison to CD34+ cells from BM and peripheral blood.5. CD34+ cells we obtained in each cord blood sample were very limited. It is not enough to screen the inhibitors conc

38、entrations to select the optimal inhibitory concentrations. In the blocking experiments, based on the concentrations used by others and the manufacturer's recommendation, we then determined the inhibitors concentrations by excluding the toxicity of the inhibitors in that concentration, which was

39、 determined by clonogenic assay.Minor comments:1.The spelling and syntax errors have been checked and corrected.2.Since the results in figure1Aand B were obtained from two separated and parallel experiments, it is not fitness to combine two figures.這是我的一篇修稿回復(fù)，雜志是JBMR-A,影響因子3.652,已發(fā)表，供參考！Reply to the

40、 comments on JBMR-A-05-0172Comment:Reference #10 is missing from the Introduction but used much later in the manuscript. Should these be in order used in manuscript?Reply:The missing reference has been added into the revised manuscript.Comment (continued):What is the sample size for all tests perfor

41、med?Reply:The sample size for drug release and PCL degradation tests was 3.0×3.0 cm2, with a thickness of about0.1mmand a weight of about 40mg. This dada have been added into the revised manuscript.Comment (continued):Figure 7. There is no scientific evidence presented in the TEM figure to conv

42、ince this reviewer of sub-jets. This statement on Page 9 cannot be made without clear evidence during the jet formation/separation. Figure 7 is just a large fiber and small fiber fused together, no other conclusion than this can be made.Reply:Necessary change in the statements has been made in the r

43、evised manuscript. as well as in the referred figure accordingly.Comment (continued):Table 3: Need standard deviation for all values reported not just for a select few.Equation after Table 3 not necessary. Just reference method used.Reply:Done accordingly.Comment (continued):Page 11: "faster we

44、ight loss" What was the sample size? Where is the statistical analysis of this data? This reviewer does not see a significant difference in any of the data presented, thus weight loss would be considered equivalent.Reply:Although not too much difference was seen, the conclusion that “the GS/PCL

45、 membrane exhibited a relatively faster weight loss compared with the RT/PCL membrane” was indeed applicable through “one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)” analysis. Following the reviewers comment, a new sub-section has been added to the manuscript. to address the statistical analysis for the data.

46、Comment (continued):Page 12: What is the sample size for release data? Looks like results based on a sample size of one? Need stand deviations on the data presented in Figure 11. Why wasn't releaseperformed and compared for all electrospun conditions investigated otherwise?Reply:Three repeated t

47、ests were performed for each set of measurements and the resulting data were averaged. As stated in the revised manuscript, each sample had a square area of 33cm2 with a slightly different thickness.Standard deviations have been added to the data shown in Fig. 11.The present manuscript.

48、aimed to show that medical drugs can be encapsulated in ultrafine fibers through a co-axial electrospinning process. The drug release data intended to show that the encapsulation was successful. We did not consider any specific application in this preliminary paper, and in fact the two drugs were ju

49、st chosen as model illustration. As such, there seemed not necessary to perform. release experiments for all of the membranes electrospun with different conditions (i.e. the core concentrations)Comment (continued):Table 3: Yang's or Young's Modulus (page 10 says Young's).Reply:Corrected

50、accordingly.Comment (continued):Figure 11: What is the % release, not just concentration. Why just this small sample of release data? Where is the release data for the other conditions?Reply:Unfortunately, we did not measure the amount of the shell material in obtaining the composite nanofibers. Nam

51、ely, the flow rate of the shell solution during the electrospinning was not accurately controlled using an injecting pump. Hence the % release was not applicable. Please refer to the previous reply related to Page 12 and Figure 11 for the remaining comments.We acknowledge the reviewers comments and

52、suggestions very much, which are valuable in improving the quality of our manuscript.SCI生物醫(yī)學(xué)英文論文發(fā)表成功經(jīng)驗(yàn)發(fā)表成功經(jīng)驗(yàn)  SCI生物醫(yī)學(xué)英文論文發(fā)表成功經(jīng)驗(yàn)共享系列一-（Clinical Chemistry）將自己近10年的科研工作中有關(guān)論文整理總結(jié)發(fā)表方面的一些信息貢獻(xiàn)出來，與大家共享！如有時(shí)間，我擬將一些已經(jīng)發(fā)表的文章，按照撰寫與發(fā)表的實(shí)際經(jīng)歷與過程，即通過案例分析每一個(gè)雜志的特色，審稿偏好，review意見及答復(fù)要點(diǎn)等逐一分析。可能包含的雜志系列有：nature methods，c

53、linical chemistry，analytical chemistry，J. Clin. Immuno，Biomed. Microdev，F(xiàn)ront. Biosci，Mol. Cell. Biochem，J. Expert，Rev. Proteomics，J biochemistry等。本章先講解美國(guó)Clinical Chemistry雜志，一個(gè)臨床化學(xué)界的王牌雜志，近年其影響因子逐年攀升，現(xiàn)為7.7分。Clinical Chemistry由美國(guó)AACC每月出版，接受的文章包括與人體疾病相關(guān)的實(shí)驗(yàn)室研究，分析與分子診斷，儀器，資料處理，數(shù)據(jù)分析，臨床研究等投稿。ISSN：0009-914

54、7網(wǎng)絡(luò)版ISSN：1530-8561【URL】/【鏡像URL】/【出版者】American Association for Clinical Chemistry (AACC)【收費(fèi)情況】 免費(fèi),全文【內(nèi)容簡(jiǎn)介】Clinical Chemistry is an international journal of laboratory medicine and molecular diagnostics.Clinical Chemistry - This highly respected and often-c

55、ited scientific journal is published monthly and contains peer-reviewed methodology, research papers and other articles relevant to clinical chemistry and related laboratory sciences. Its circulation is more than 15,000.David E. Bruns, MD, Editor, (Charlottesville Office)Sandr

56、a Weaver, Senior Editorial ADonna Brandl, Editorial AShane P. Cyr, Editorial AMac Fancher, Publisher, (WashingtonOffice)Miriam Gonzalez, Publications C【目錄、摘要或全文上網(wǎng)等情

57、況】Free TOC, 1965 -Free Abstract, 1975 -Free Fulltext, 1997 -1999Fulltext, 1997 - 【雜志被索引的情況】Indexed in Chemical Abstracts.【備注】For faster access to Clinical Chemistry Online from these countries use this URL:Australia, Brazil, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico,Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, The Netherlands, UK該雜志是由美國(guó)臨床化學(xué)協(xié)會(huì)（American