首页

> 期刊发表知识库

首页 期刊发表知识库 问题

被邀请SCI审稿有什么好处

发布时间:

被邀请SCI审稿有什么好处

下面我就为大家具体介绍发表一篇SCI,对您到底意味着什么?•一、发表一篇SCI意味着保研几率大增如果你非常优秀,可以在大学期间,发表1篇SCI论文,这对你保送研究生帮助非常大,分区越高,加分越多。但是,发表SCI并不意味着你一定可以成功,同时

达晋编译为您解答:这个当然有了,因为SCI审稿的话,肯定会给你一定的审稿意见,这样的话你就可以根据意见来修改你的论文,提升自己的论文通过率。你可以沟通我们,专业的SCI论文意见有助于你顺利的通过SCI论文。

发表SCI论文除了晋升职称;临床医生在发现新的未知疾病时,可以通过医学论文很直观地展示出来,这也是专家学者在学术交流时一条很便捷的桥梁,载体;不仅能磨练自己的意志也可以加深自己对医学工作的认知;一篇优秀的医学论文可以作为一张名片把作者介绍出去,对作者有一个中肯的评价,就是对医生工作的高度赞扬。

说简单通俗一点,如果你发表了一篇sci的文章,意味着你的学术水平保底可以和世界相关专业的水平一较高下,但是需要注意,sci也是有分值的。

被sci邀请审稿

�皇嵌晕颐钦庑┬〉ノ坏娜司涂嗔耍�蛭�悴蝗鲜端�牵�膊豢赡苁撬�堑难��D阒挥小⒅荒芡ü�岣咦约何恼轮柿坎鸥�谢�帷;褂芯褪锹���省⑿��,但目前因为杂志生存的原因,较之以前速度可能也都快起来了,也甚至还有些只要给钱就收的杂志,类似于西太平洋大学似的,这是卖文凭,人家就是卖文章的,当然我想大部分杂志还是能够“客观、公正”进行稿源选择吧,但愿吧。 那SCI杂志又是如何审稿呢,相反应该更“客观”,至少不会歧视你是来自无名的单位,就受邀于几个杂志作为其审稿人来说,绝大部分都采用同行审稿(peer-review),也即邀请你审稿的文章多半是与被邀请人所作的研究相似,这就不存在一定是所谓的“牛人”来审了。与你的职称完全没有关系,不是说教授就有资格,而初级就没有资格被SCI杂志邀请审稿杂志社一般都会通过你发表文章找到你的email(我想应该是这样的,所以通讯更牛叉啊,否在人家不会邀请到你的) 当然你也可以拒绝,因为毕竟不是所有的文章我们都有能力去审的,至少我还没那水平,也曾拒绝过一篇关于基因分析的(虽然了解一些,但很难把握)如你接受后,则会自动连接到审稿人页面(如下),除了author centre外,同时也有reviewer centre的页而一般如果没有被邀请审稿,通常进入作者系统后,只会有anthor centre接下来就是审稿了,这篇文章是国内某F教授为通讯的一篇关于血管紧张素在皮肤中作用的综述,毕竟人家在国内还是相当的啊,也是顺便学习了一下,可一下载稿件一看,怎么看怎么不像综述,充其量是个mini review,四个段落,1198个字,26篇参考文献。既然杂志社邀请我审稿,也综述的我所做过的研究,却没引用我的文章,有点“失落”,更重要的是更多文献他们也没有引用,而是引用他们自己的“中文”文章,但还是认真的“分析”了此文。给出审稿意见如下:The review by *** et addresses the interesting and novel topic of the renin-angiotensin-system (RAS), which was originally described as a cardiovascular endocrine system, in skin physiology and Only in recent years, the cutaneous RAS has become an area of scientific interest, and the number of related publications is increasing from year to Therefore, it is indeed time for an article which reviews the existing literature up to However, this review has a number of 中国人语言每次都被审稿人发飙,我的也是,至少部分文章投出去审稿人也是要让我改进,唔,每次让我找个母语的人帮修改,我滴个汗,俺们中国人哪有以说英语母语的,索性每次都“忽悠”过去了,当然也许只是些小杂志的原因吧,语言真的需要提高、再提高。同样该综述,我也提出了我的部分语言意见 - Language editing is - The number of publications dealing with the RAS in skin is still not very Therefore, there is no need to focus this review article on the AT2-receptor (for which data are even more limited) Instead, this review should consider all published data about the cutaneous RAS - Many publications are For example: �6�1Min et , Endocrinology 2004 �6�1Nakai et , J Dermatol Sci 2008 �6�1Rompe et , Hypertension 2010 �6�1Steckelings et , (Exp Dermatol 2004) �6�1Yevdokimova et , J Dermatol Sci 2007 �6�1Morihara et , J Am Acad Dermatol 2006 �6�1Yahata et , J Biol Chem 2006 �6�1Takeda et , Am J Pathol 2004 并逐部分给予我的意见:Abstract:- In the case of AT1R-blockade, AT2R unmasking may indeed be important, but blockade of the AT1R thus interrupting AT1R-mediated actions of Ang II, is at least as The respective passage in the abstract is Introduction: - 3, line 13: “disorders of RAS”: A “disorder” of the RAS has so far only been described for scleroderma (not saying whether the deregulated RAS is a primary cause or only a secondary phenomenon) It is indeed likely that the RAS is deregulated in the other mentioned dermatoses as well, but this is pure speculation and should be discussed as - 3, line 19: “existence of RAS in skin”: References 2 and 3 demonstrate only the existence of receptors, but not of the whole RAS in Adequate references would be: Steckelings et , Exp Dermatol or Philips MI et , In: Saavedra J M, Timmermans P M W M, Angiotensin New York: Plenum Press, 1994: 377– - 3, line 20: “It has been documented…”: It is correct that AT2R upregulation has been demonstrated in skin, and it is also correct that Ang II has been shown to accelerate cutaneous wound However, it has never been shown that acceleration of wound healing by Ang II is mediated by the AT2R In fact, this is rather unlikely, since the AT2R acts anti- - Chapter II 1: Physiological receptor expression should be addressed prior to receptor expression in - p4, line 5 from bottom: “Ang II either…” Please add - chapter II 2: The high expression of Ang II receptors during foetal life indeed suggests a role in However, Ang II receptor knockout mice show no severe developmental deficits, in particular not in Furthermore, there are almost no data about what specifically the role of the AT2R in development may This should be - chapter II 3: This chapter is much too For example, the description of deregulated receptor expression in some dermatoses by Takeda and Kondo (Am J Pathol 2001, Br J Dermatol 2001 and 2002) has not been This chapter may further be the place for some speculations (based on data from non-cutaneous tissues) in which dermatoses the RAS may be - page 5, line 5: “Kawaguchi et al …in SSc fibroblasts, suggesting that… “: This is not a logical What is the causal link between AT2R in SSc fibroblasts and excessive ECM production? Furthermore, expression of AT2R has been shown by several authors for normal - page 5, line 12: Steckelings is a woman (“her” colleagues) - page 5, last section: The impact of AT2R expression on immune cells and of AT2R effects on vascularisation and neuroregeneration with regard to wound healing is not sufficiently - 6, 2 lines from bottom: “…restoring normality not only in the CV system but also in many tissues, such as ” Please provide a reference for the statement that the AT2R has been shown to restore normality in 最后提交时杂志社会有一个勾选表,该文被我拒了该文编辑在结合另一个审稿人意见的情况下还是reject此文了,从投稿到最后给出decision约6个星期,应该说是正常速度了。有意思的是中途,编辑发信催审稿了,估计是作者急着想知道结果,可以理解,想想之前的我们也何尝不是啊,每天都不停得刷屏,也写过催稿信,还以为没有用,甚至有时候也不“敢”写,因为害怕是否会有“反”作用,看来某些时候写信催催也还是可以的。总之,审稿也未必是件好差事,不过倒是可以知己知彼,可以站在审稿人的角度去思考我们自己在写文章的时候应该注意什么,别人文章的有哪些优点、缺点,我们都可以好好去总结,同时我们也获得与最新研究领域的接触也为以后研究,能够写作提供更多的思路。

被邀请审稿对发文章有好处吗

首先,审稿本身对于审稿人是件吃力不讨好的事。目前绝大多数的审稿是无偿审稿,研究者出于学术职责,更好地服务于学术社区,而接受editor/area chair的审稿邀请。我在审阅一篇跟我研究方向一致的论文的时候,大概会前前后后花4-5个小时。而当幸幸苦苦誊写完r审阅意见的时候,还是匿名提交(double blind or single blind)=,=。所以作为论文审稿人,在审稿过程中并没有任何物质回报,还出于义务花费了自己的大量时间,在此向广大期刊和会议审稿人致敬:)。我自己所在的计算机科学的人工智能研究领域,更重视顶级会议论文,如CVPR,ICML等。审阅这些顶级会议的论文往往要比审阅期刊投稿有意思,因为投稿这些会议的论文都一般是最新研究工作,审阅人可以比常人更早的看到这些工作。不过,这个更早看到最新研究工作的优势也随着最近大家一投稿就放arxiv的趋势抹去了。这些会议论文审稿都是double blind,就是审阅人和投稿人都不知道对方是谁。审稿过程中还会有rebuttal阶段(作者根据接收到审稿意见后进行反驳和进一步解释的过程),以及审稿人之间的讨论和最后投票阶段,这之中有些时候会变得挺有意思。比如说,在最后审稿人讨论阶段,当两个审稿人之间对于这篇论文意见出现分歧的时候,有时候他们会争锋相对地fight for or fight against这篇论文,产生一些蛮有见地的学术争论,而area chair/editor会作壁上观,根据这些学术争论来最后定夺是否接收这篇论文。不过,很多时候审稿人只会根据少数服从多数的原则,对一篇论文接收和拒绝与否达成共识。

说自己“没时间”也可;说自己不熟悉稿件领域,恐不能胜任,也可。 对审稿请求装聋作哑,置之不理是最恶劣的行径,会耽误该稿件的整个处理进程。这种情况会给编辑工作带来极大的麻烦,如果一个人屡屡如此表现,会上杂志的黑名单。这样,此后只要有此人作为共同作者的投稿论文,都会被秒拒,后果很严重!对审稿请求装聋作哑,置之不理是最恶劣的行径,会耽误该稿件的整个处理进程,这种情况会给编辑工作带来极大的麻烦说自己不熟悉稿件领域,恐不能胜任,也可

SCI被邀请为审稿

�皇嵌晕颐钦庑┬〉ノ坏娜司涂嗔耍�蛭�悴蝗鲜端�牵�膊豢赡苁撬�堑难��D阒挥小⒅荒芡ü�岣咦约何恼轮柿坎鸥�谢�帷;褂芯褪锹���省⑿��,但目前因为杂志生存的原因,较之以前速度可能也都快起来了,也甚至还有些只要给钱就收的杂志,类似于西太平洋大学似的,这是卖文凭,人家就是卖文章的,当然我想大部分杂志还是能够“客观、公正”进行稿源选择吧,但愿吧。 那SCI杂志又是如何审稿呢,相反应该更“客观”,至少不会歧视你是来自无名的单位,就受邀于几个杂志作为其审稿人来说,绝大部分都采用同行审稿(peer-review),也即邀请你审稿的文章多半是与被邀请人所作的研究相似,这就不存在一定是所谓的“牛人”来审了。与你的职称完全没有关系,不是说教授就有资格,而初级就没有资格被SCI杂志邀请审稿杂志社一般都会通过你发表文章找到你的email(我想应该是这样的,所以通讯更牛叉啊,否在人家不会邀请到你的) 当然你也可以拒绝,因为毕竟不是所有的文章我们都有能力去审的,至少我还没那水平,也曾拒绝过一篇关于基因分析的(虽然了解一些,但很难把握)如你接受后,则会自动连接到审稿人页面(如下),除了author centre外,同时也有reviewer centre的页而一般如果没有被邀请审稿,通常进入作者系统后,只会有anthor centre接下来就是审稿了,这篇文章是国内某F教授为通讯的一篇关于血管紧张素在皮肤中作用的综述,毕竟人家在国内还是相当的啊,也是顺便学习了一下,可一下载稿件一看,怎么看怎么不像综述,充其量是个mini review,四个段落,1198个字,26篇参考文献。既然杂志社邀请我审稿,也综述的我所做过的研究,却没引用我的文章,有点“失落”,更重要的是更多文献他们也没有引用,而是引用他们自己的“中文”文章,但还是认真的“分析”了此文。给出审稿意见如下:The review by *** et addresses the interesting and novel topic of the renin-angiotensin-system (RAS), which was originally described as a cardiovascular endocrine system, in skin physiology and Only in recent years, the cutaneous RAS has become an area of scientific interest, and the number of related publications is increasing from year to Therefore, it is indeed time for an article which reviews the existing literature up to However, this review has a number of 中国人语言每次都被审稿人发飙,我的也是,至少部分文章投出去审稿人也是要让我改进,唔,每次让我找个母语的人帮修改,我滴个汗,俺们中国人哪有以说英语母语的,索性每次都“忽悠”过去了,当然也许只是些小杂志的原因吧,语言真的需要提高、再提高。同样该综述,我也提出了我的部分语言意见 - Language editing is - The number of publications dealing with the RAS in skin is still not very Therefore, there is no need to focus this review article on the AT2-receptor (for which data are even more limited) Instead, this review should consider all published data about the cutaneous RAS - Many publications are For example: �6�1Min et , Endocrinology 2004 �6�1Nakai et , J Dermatol Sci 2008 �6�1Rompe et , Hypertension 2010 �6�1Steckelings et , (Exp Dermatol 2004) �6�1Yevdokimova et , J Dermatol Sci 2007 �6�1Morihara et , J Am Acad Dermatol 2006 �6�1Yahata et , J Biol Chem 2006 �6�1Takeda et , Am J Pathol 2004 并逐部分给予我的意见:Abstract:- In the case of AT1R-blockade, AT2R unmasking may indeed be important, but blockade of the AT1R thus interrupting AT1R-mediated actions of Ang II, is at least as The respective passage in the abstract is Introduction: - 3, line 13: “disorders of RAS”: A “disorder” of the RAS has so far only been described for scleroderma (not saying whether the deregulated RAS is a primary cause or only a secondary phenomenon) It is indeed likely that the RAS is deregulated in the other mentioned dermatoses as well, but this is pure speculation and should be discussed as - 3, line 19: “existence of RAS in skin”: References 2 and 3 demonstrate only the existence of receptors, but not of the whole RAS in Adequate references would be: Steckelings et , Exp Dermatol or Philips MI et , In: Saavedra J M, Timmermans P M W M, Angiotensin New York: Plenum Press, 1994: 377– - 3, line 20: “It has been documented…”: It is correct that AT2R upregulation has been demonstrated in skin, and it is also correct that Ang II has been shown to accelerate cutaneous wound However, it has never been shown that acceleration of wound healing by Ang II is mediated by the AT2R In fact, this is rather unlikely, since the AT2R acts anti- - Chapter II 1: Physiological receptor expression should be addressed prior to receptor expression in - p4, line 5 from bottom: “Ang II either…” Please add - chapter II 2: The high expression of Ang II receptors during foetal life indeed suggests a role in However, Ang II receptor knockout mice show no severe developmental deficits, in particular not in Furthermore, there are almost no data about what specifically the role of the AT2R in development may This should be - chapter II 3: This chapter is much too For example, the description of deregulated receptor expression in some dermatoses by Takeda and Kondo (Am J Pathol 2001, Br J Dermatol 2001 and 2002) has not been This chapter may further be the place for some speculations (based on data from non-cutaneous tissues) in which dermatoses the RAS may be - page 5, line 5: “Kawaguchi et al …in SSc fibroblasts, suggesting that… “: This is not a logical What is the causal link between AT2R in SSc fibroblasts and excessive ECM production? Furthermore, expression of AT2R has been shown by several authors for normal - page 5, line 12: Steckelings is a woman (“her” colleagues) - page 5, last section: The impact of AT2R expression on immune cells and of AT2R effects on vascularisation and neuroregeneration with regard to wound healing is not sufficiently - 6, 2 lines from bottom: “…restoring normality not only in the CV system but also in many tissues, such as ” Please provide a reference for the statement that the AT2R has been shown to restore normality in 最后提交时杂志社会有一个勾选表,该文被我拒了该文编辑在结合另一个审稿人意见的情况下还是reject此文了,从投稿到最后给出decision约6个星期,应该说是正常速度了。有意思的是中途,编辑发信催审稿了,估计是作者急着想知道结果,可以理解,想想之前的我们也何尝不是啊,每天都不停得刷屏,也写过催稿信,还以为没有用,甚至有时候也不“敢”写,因为害怕是否会有“反”作用,看来某些时候写信催催也还是可以的。总之,审稿也未必是件好差事,不过倒是可以知己知彼,可以站在审稿人的角度去思考我们自己在写文章的时候应该注意什么,别人文章的有哪些优点、缺点,我们都可以好好去总结,同时我们也获得与最新研究领域的接触也为以后研究,能够写作提供更多的思路。

被sci邀请审稿,怎么回复

国外审稿人是义务的,可以根据文章质量和自己的看法自由地提出意见和建议。国外审稿人绝大多数治学严谨,很注重reputation,可以说拿信誉当生命。当他们接到审稿要求时,如果很忙或不懂你的专业或领域,他们会decline。但只要答应审稿,一般都是尽职尽责的完成审稿任务。因此,当你接到审稿人的意见时,首先要摆正心态,保持冷静。不要用偏见的心态去断定审稿人有偏见、歧视。做研究的确很辛苦,发表文章也确实很不容易。但审稿人同样也很辛苦,也很不容易。他们认认真真地阅读你的文章,给你提出中肯的意见,甚至很好的建议。如果还被你措辞强硬的怪罪一阵,换着谁也会生气。要知道,找理由拒绝一篇文章并不是一件很难的事情。因此,这个时候,你一定要好好的静下心来,好好分析sci论文发表审稿人的意见,找出问题的所在。所有问题必须逐条回答;尽量满足意见中需要补充的实验;满足不了的也不要回避,说明不能做的合理理由;4。对于你不认同的意见,也要委婉有技巧地回答,做到有理有据有节;审稿人推荐的文献一定要引用,并加以讨论。

你是要回复通知文章被接受的邮件么?不用回的,按要求签版权转让协议然后等proof校样就是了。

首先绝对服从编辑的意见在审稿人给出各自的意见之后,编辑一般不会再提出自己的意见。但是,编辑一旦提出某些意见,就意味着他认为这是文章里的重大缺陷,至少是不合他的口味。这时,我们唯一能够做的只能是服从。因为毕竟是人家掌握着生杀予夺的大权。第二永远不要跟审稿人争执跟审稿人起争执是非常不明智的一件事情。审稿人意见如果正确那就不用说了,直接照办就是。如果不正确的话,也大可不必在回复中冷嘲热讽,心平气和的说明白就是了。

这是审稿人对语言不满意,就回复我们会找母语人士润色就可以了。我也遇到过这种情况,不过是期刊编辑的意见,还推荐了一家国外的润色公司,我嫌发邮件沟通太费事了,就找了国内的艾德思,半夜10点11点问问题仍然能回复⌄开发票也方便,润色质量的话,反正我返修稿编辑和审稿人没再提语言的事儿。

相关百科

热门百科

首页
发表服务