发布时间：
英文论文审稿意见汇总 2011-04-24 19:24 以下12点无轻重主次之分。每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成。 1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 ◆ In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical me thods used in the study. ◆ Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided. 3、对于研究设计的rationale: Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation. 5、对hypothesis的清晰界定： A hypothesis needs to be presented。 6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念： What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio? 7、对研究问题的定义： Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear, write one section to define the problem 8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review: The topic is novel but the application proposed is not so novel. 9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification: There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with previously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on previous work. 10、严谨度问题： MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to prove that. 11、格式（重视程度）： ◆ In addition, the list of references is not in our style. It is close but not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with "Instructions for Authors" which shows examples. ◆ Before submitting a revision be sure that your material is properly prepared and formatted. If you are unsure, please consult the formatting nstructions to authors that are given under the "Instructions and Forms" button in he upper right-hand corner of the screen. 12、语言问题（出现最多的问题）： 有关语言的审稿人意见： ◆ It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. ◆ The authors must have their work reviewed by a proper translation/reviewing service before submission; only then can a proper review be performed. Most sentences contain grammatical and/or spelling mistakes or are not complete sentences. ◆ As presented, the writing is not acceptable for the journal. There are pro blems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction. ◆ The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We str ongly suggest that you obtain assistance from a colleague who is well-versed i n English or whose native language is English. ◆ Please have someone competent in the English language and the subject matte r of your paper go over the paper and correct it. ? ◆ the quality of English needs improving. 来自编辑的鼓励： Encouragement from reviewers: ◆ I would be very glad to re-review the paper in greater depth once it has be en edited because the subject is interesting. ◆ There is continued interest in your manuscript titled "……" which you subm itted to the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research: Part B - Applied Biomat erials. ◆ The Submission has been greatly improved and is worthy of publication. 本文来自CSDN博客，转载请标明出处： 老外写的英文综述文章的审稿意见 Ms. Ref. No.: ****** Title: ****** Materials Science and Engineering Dear Dr. ******, Reviewers have now commented on your p aper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision. For your guidance, reviewers" comments are appended below. Reviewer #1: This work proposes an extensive review on micromulsion-based methods for the synthesis of Ag nanoparticles. As such, the matter is of interest, however the paper suffers for two serious limits: 1) the overall quality of the English language is rather poor; 2) some Figures must be selected from previous literature to discuss also the synthesis of anisotropically shaped Ag nanoparticles (there are several examples published), which has been largely overlooked throughout the paper. ; Once the above concerns are fully addressed, the manuscript could be accepted for publication in this journal 来源:.htm 这是一篇全过程我均比较了解的投稿，稿件的内容我认为是相当不错的，中文版投稿于业内有较高影响的某核心期刊，并很快得到发表。其时我作为审稿人之一，除了提出一些修改建议外，还特建议了5篇应增加的参考文献，该文正式发表时共计有参考文献25篇。 作者或许看到审稿意见还不错，因此决意尝试向美国某学会主办的一份英文刊投稿。几经修改和补充后，请一位英文“功底"较好的中国人翻译，投稿后约3周，便返回了三份审稿意见。 从英文刊的反馈意见看，这篇稿件中最严重的问题是文献综述和引用不够，其次是语言表达方面的欠缺，此外是论证过程和结果展示形式方面的不足。 感想：一篇好的论文，从内容到形式都需要精雕细琢。 附1：中译审稿意见 审稿意见—1 (1) 英文表达太差，尽管意思大致能表达清楚，但文法错误太多。 (2) 文献综述较差，观点或论断应有文献支持。 (3) 论文读起来像是XXX的广告，不知道作者与XXX是否没有关联。 (4) 该模式的创新性并非如作者所述，目前有许多XX采取此模式（如美国地球物理学会），作者应详加调查并分析XXX运作模式的创新点。 (5) 该模式也不是作者所说的那样成功……(审稿人结合论文中的数据具体分析) 审稿意见—2 (1) 缺少直接相关的文献引用(如…)。 (2) 写作质量达不到美国学术期刊的标准。 审稿意见—3 (1) 作者应着重指出指出本人的贡献。 (2) 缺少支持作者发现的方法学分析。 (3) 需要采用表格和图件形式展示(数据)材料。 附2：英文审稿意见(略有删节) Reviewer: 1 There are many things wrong with this paper. The English is very bad. Although the meaning is by and large clear, not too many sentences are correct. The literature review is poor. The paper is riddled with assertions and claims that should be supported by references. The paper reads as an advertisement for XXX. It is not clear that the author is independent of XXX. The AA model of XXX is not as innovative as the author claims. There are now many XX that follow this model (American Geophysical Union, for example), and the author should survey these model to see which one first introduced the elements of the XXX model. The model is also not as successful as the author claims. …… Overall, the presentation and the contents of the paper can only mean that I reject that the paper be rejected. Reviewer: 2 The are two major problems with this paper: (1) It is missing the context of (and citations to) what is now know as the "two-sided" market literature including that directly related to … (. Braunstein, JASIS 1977; Economides & Katsanakas, Mgt. Sci., 2006; McCabe & Snyder, . J Econ Analysis, 2007). (2) The writing quality is not up to the standard of a US scholarly journal. Reviewer: 3 1. The author should accentuate his contributions in this manuscript. 2. It lacks analytical methodologies to support author’s discoveries. 3. Description style material like this manuscript requires structured tables & figures for better presentations.
这个很难说，呵呵。要不等，要不就直接打编辑部电话问。
如果投上去没有被秒拒，一般都是送外审了。想查看的话，可以用您投稿时在杂志注册的用户名和密码，登录之后找到Author center,点击您已投的文章，如果处在under review 状态的话，说明已送审。MedSci投稿经验分享系统中，有许多乐于分享的作者会白把自己的投稿时间，命中率，如何回复审稿人问题等贴出来，希望您可以从中得到帮助。
sci查询方法如下：
1、网站查询。
当文章是SCI文章，我们可以登录web of science网站就可以查询。如果我们能查询到，那么证明该文章是SCI。Web of Science是搜索SCI收录文章最常用的方法，但网站需要会员登录才能使用。不过大多数学校或图书馆都购买了网站资源，相关人员可到学校图书馆查询。
2、期刊查询。
如果文章是SCI，则表示该文章已发表在SCI期刊上。只要我们查询文章发表的期刊是否是SCI期刊，就可以判断文章是SCI。此外，SCI期刊目录会定期更新。每次更新都会增加新的期刊，也会踢掉一些原有的期刊。因此，在检查期刊是否为SCI期刊时，还应注意文章发表的时间。
还需要提醒的是，有时候一篇文章发表在SCI期刊上，该期刊在SCI上可以检索到，但是检索不到这篇文章，那么那篇文章只是online来，而不能在Web of Science上检索到。
此时，严格来说，这篇sci论文还没有在SCI期刊上发表。但也可以通过这本期刊是SCI期刊的检索证明和该文章的接收证明间接证明该SCI论文还未上线。
其实SCI论文不光是英文的，一些中文期刊，韩文、俄文、德文、法文的文献都可以在Web of Science上检索到，但是大部分知名期刊当然还是英文的。
如果一篇文章发表在新的期刊上，一般来说，如果是比较知名的出版商，比如Wiley、ACS、RSC、IEEE，即使该期刊在首次发表时没有被SCI收录，迟早会被包括在内。但是一个比较偏门的出版商就很难说来，所以想看SCI论文可以在选择期刊的时候去选择比较知名的出版商旗下的期刊。
1、正确选择对口的SCI期刊，可以自行选择期刊。原则上是先投递高影响因子的杂志，然后不断降低级别。
2、不能进行一稿两投，这是严格禁止的。
3、正确选择必须推荐的审稿人：除杂志有要求，或你研究的领域非常狭窄外，不推荐编辑。如果必须选择推荐的审稿人，应尽量选择同行中的专家。
4、催稿应根据这个杂志通常审稿周期来定。具体审稿周期，可以参考投稿系统。
5、提高一次投稿的成功率：文章本身的创新性是第一位因素，对口期刊选择、文章格式完美、语句通顺（符合英文习惯）等也很重要。
6、版权协议和利益冲突表格要谨慎填写。签名时尽量不要代签，以免被编辑发现时的尴尬。
7、尽可能参照投稿说明，认真修改手稿格式。这一点是衡量一位科研工作者的严谨程度，建议大家认真阅读《提交简介》，逐条地改正，以防延误同行评审时间。
8、修改后投稿一定要核对初稿中改正的地方：标题、摘要、简历等。
编辑要求在COVER LETTER逐点解释修改的内容，对所有同行评议的内容都应逐点解释。逐点的意思是要回答审稿人的每个问题。而不是详细列举在文章中如何具体修改的（用红色标出来就可以了或是word的跟踪修订功能） SCI文章修回的COVER LETTER模板如下： Dear you very much for your letter and advice. We have revised the paper, and would like to re-submit it for your consideration. We have addressed the comments raised by the reviewers, and the amendments are highlighted in red in the revised manuscript. We hope that the revision is acceptable, and I look forward to hearing from you soon. With best wishes,Yours sincerely,XXXXXX================================================================（换页）We would like to express our sincere thanks to the reviewers for the constructive and positive to Reviewer 1XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXReplies to Reviewer 2XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXReplies to Reviewer 3XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
英文论文审稿意见汇总 2011-04-24 19:24 以下12点无轻重主次之分。每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成。 1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 ◆ In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical me thods used in the study. ◆ Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided. 3、对于研究设计的rationale: Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation. 5、对hypothesis的清晰界定： A hypothesis needs to be presented。 6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念： What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio? 7、对研究问题的定义： Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear, write one section to define the problem 8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review: The topic is novel but the application proposed is not so novel. 9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification: There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with previously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on previous work. 10、严谨度问题： MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to prove that. 11、格式（重视程度）： ◆ In addition, the list of references is not in our style. It is close but not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with "Instructions for Authors" which shows examples. ◆ Before submitting a revision be sure that your material is properly prepared and formatted. If you are unsure, please consult the formatting nstructions to authors that are given under the "Instructions and Forms" button in he upper right-hand corner of the screen. 12、语言问题（出现最多的问题）： 有关语言的审稿人意见： ◆ It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. ◆ The authors must have their work reviewed by a proper translation/reviewing service before submission; only then can a proper review be performed. Most sentences contain grammatical and/or spelling mistakes or are not complete sentences. ◆ As presented, the writing is not acceptable for the journal. There are pro blems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction. ◆ The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We str ongly suggest that you obtain assistance from a colleague who is well-versed i n English or whose native language is English. ◆ Please have someone competent in the English language and the subject matte r of your paper go over the paper and correct it. ? ◆ the quality of English needs improving. 来自编辑的鼓励： Encouragement from reviewers: ◆ I would be very glad to re-review the paper in greater depth once it has be en edited because the subject is interesting. ◆ There is continued interest in your manuscript titled "……" which you subm itted to the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research: Part B - Applied Biomat erials. ◆ The Submission has been greatly improved and is worthy of publication. 本文来自CSDN博客，转载请标明出处： 老外写的英文综述文章的审稿意见 Ms. Ref. No.: ****** Title: ****** Materials Science and Engineering Dear Dr. ******, Reviewers have now commented on your p aper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision. For your guidance, reviewers" comments are appended below. Reviewer #1: This work proposes an extensive review on micromulsion-based methods for the synthesis of Ag nanoparticles. As such, the matter is of interest, however the paper suffers for two serious limits: 1) the overall quality of the English language is rather poor; 2) some Figures must be selected from previous literature to discuss also the synthesis of anisotropically shaped Ag nanoparticles (there are several examples published), which has been largely overlooked throughout the paper. ; Once the above concerns are fully addressed, the manuscript could be accepted for publication in this journal 来源:.htm 这是一篇全过程我均比较了解的投稿，稿件的内容我认为是相当不错的，中文版投稿于业内有较高影响的某核心期刊，并很快得到发表。其时我作为审稿人之一，除了提出一些修改建议外，还特建议了5篇应增加的参考文献，该文正式发表时共计有参考文献25篇。 作者或许看到审稿意见还不错，因此决意尝试向美国某学会主办的一份英文刊投稿。几经修改和补充后，请一位英文“功底"较好的中国人翻译，投稿后约3周，便返回了三份审稿意见。 从英文刊的反馈意见看，这篇稿件中最严重的问题是文献综述和引用不够，其次是语言表达方面的欠缺，此外是论证过程和结果展示形式方面的不足。 感想：一篇好的论文，从内容到形式都需要精雕细琢。 附1：中译审稿意见 审稿意见—1 (1) 英文表达太差，尽管意思大致能表达清楚，但文法错误太多。 (2) 文献综述较差，观点或论断应有文献支持。 (3) 论文读起来像是XXX的广告，不知道作者与XXX是否没有关联。 (4) 该模式的创新性并非如作者所述，目前有许多XX采取此模式（如美国地球物理学会），作者应详加调查并分析XXX运作模式的创新点。 (5) 该模式也不是作者所说的那样成功……(审稿人结合论文中的数据具体分析) 审稿意见—2 (1) 缺少直接相关的文献引用(如…)。 (2) 写作质量达不到美国学术期刊的标准。 审稿意见—3 (1) 作者应着重指出指出本人的贡献。 (2) 缺少支持作者发现的方法学分析。 (3) 需要采用表格和图件形式展示(数据)材料。 附2：英文审稿意见(略有删节) Reviewer: 1 There are many things wrong with this paper. The English is very bad. Although the meaning is by and large clear, not too many sentences are correct. The literature review is poor. The paper is riddled with assertions and claims that should be supported by references. The paper reads as an advertisement for XXX. It is not clear that the author is independent of XXX. The AA model of XXX is not as innovative as the author claims. There are now many XX that follow this model (American Geophysical Union, for example), and the author should survey these model to see which one first introduced the elements of the XXX model. The model is also not as successful as the author claims. …… Overall, the presentation and the contents of the paper can only mean that I reject that the paper be rejected. Reviewer: 2 The are two major problems with this paper: (1) It is missing the context of (and citations to) what is now know as the "two-sided" market literature including that directly related to … (. Braunstein, JASIS 1977; Economides & Katsanakas, Mgt. Sci., 2006; McCabe & Snyder, . J Econ Analysis, 2007). (2) The writing quality is not up to the standard of a US scholarly journal. Reviewer: 3 1. The author should accentuate his contributions in this manuscript. 2. It lacks analytical methodologies to support author’s discoveries. 3. Description style material like this manuscript requires structured tables & figures for better presentations.
(1)、简要介绍你的稿件；
(2)、介绍你对修改稿所作的revision；
(3)、感谢reviewers的意见，并说明已经回答了审稿人提出的问题。
to reviewer：其实就是在一个文档里，逐条地、认真地回答审稿人提出的每一个问题（important），届时上传修改稿时，也将esponse to reviewer作为独立的文档上传。
SCI文章修回的COVER LETTER模板如下：Dear you very much for your letter and advice. We have revised the paper, and would like to re-submit it for your consideration. We have addressed the comments raised by the reviewers, and the amendments are highlighted in red in the revised manuscript. We hope that the revision is acceptable, and I look forward to hearing from you soon.
With best wishes,
Yours sincerely,XXXXXX================================================================（换页）We would like to express our sincere thanks to the reviewers for the constructive and positive to Reviewer 1XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXReplies to Reviewer 2XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXReplies to Reviewer 3XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
注意：
1、 对于审稿人的建议一定要礼貌地回答；
2、不要利用不同审稿人之间的不同意见相互辩驳；
3、回答不利的意见，一定要有分度，不能有较真和抵触的想法；
4、无论如何都需要对编辑和审稿人致谢。
5．本毕业设计（论文）课题工作进度计划：起 迄 日 期 工 作 内 容～ 学生准备开题报告，翻译外文资料，并撰写第一稿大纲。～ 学生完成开题报告、毕业论文大纲、英文翻译，交指导老师审阅。～ 学生修改开题报告、毕业论文大纲、英文翻译，并定稿。～ 学生撰写论文第一稿交指导老师审阅，并进行修改。～ 学生撰写论文第二稿交指导老师审阅，并进行修改。～ （1）学生根据论文定稿格式要求，完成论文定稿。（2）学生将有关论文的任务书、英文翻译、开题报告、定稿提纲、论文定稿等资料备齐，上交指导老师处。按这个模板格式套进去就可以了
第1周：确定论文主题方向，进行论文题目的筛选。第2周：以论文题目为核心，对相关资料进行收集和翻阅。第3周：对已搜集的资料加以整理，论证分析论文的可行性、实际性，将论文题目和大致范围确定下来，进行开题报告。第4周：整合已有资料、构筑论文的大纲。第5—8周：根据查找的数据和相关资料，进行深入详实的论文编写工作，对论文编写过程中所发现的问题，研究其解决方案，推敲整合，并进行修改完善，准备论文中期检查。第9-13周：完成论文的初稿部分，向指导老师寻求意见，优化论文的结构，润色语句，修改不当之处，补充不足之处。第14-15周，论文资料整合，最终定稿，为最终的答辩做好各方面准备，熟悉论文内容，增强自己对论文内容的把握，进行一定的思维发散，设计论文答辩。
金陵图(韦庄)
时光匆匆，新的一学期又开始了，在这个学期里我一定要去做一些有意义的事情，所以写下了计划。首先是加强学习，现在我的成绩还不太理想考试时全班的第三名，但是在区里面的排名还是不太好，并没有进去前一百名，挺遗憾的。这个学期我一定要成家的努力，更加的勤奋，不会让自己再一次的遗憾！其次是要多多阅读，多多写作，让自己的写作能力提高。现在的我也不知道为什么自己会这么酷爱写作，但是以前好的文章需要付出许多的汗水，我却并没有付出多少，所以并不会收获到什么好的文章，写作是需要日积月累的，在这个学期里面我一定会多多的付出，多多的阅读书籍，充实自己的生活，让自己更加完美。说道也就一定会做到，既然说出来了，我就一定会做到的。最后是要多做一些体育运动，让自己的身体更健康一些。我是个小懒虫，平时什么都不爱做，就连多走一段路都不愿意，更别提体育锻炼了，对于这一点，我还是很有自知之明的。所以以后我要多做体育运动，不能让自己这么懒下去了，否则一定会变成小猪了！这个新的学期，我一定会多做体育运动，不让自己那么懒。“十项全能”虽然说不能样样都做到，但是我一定会认真做好每一项的。新的学期，新的起点，初二下半册对于我们以后的学习生活非常重要，这正是我们学习的过度段，我不能被别人甩在后面，我要努力！新的学期计划我一定都要做到，亲爱的自己，加油吧！
可以撤稿。但最好的办法是全部审稿意见回来后在找个别的理由撤，或者不在规定期限里修改就会自然撤。中途过于明显撤稿的话，以后该刊就可能不会接受你的稿件了。
请问你最终录用了吗
感觉你好幸福，好不。慢慢等吧 说不定过半个月就直接给你录稿通知了。。我的投了2个多月还是待审核状态，甚是无语，杂志社电话一直打不通，真是无语了。朋友价格Q吧 没事交流一下 看看彼此的进度。q:1540725096
系统显示错了，很显然你的文章初审过了之后就是编委初审，没有送外审，这个期刊也没有初审过了直接送外审的情况。