一些英文審稿意見的模板

1、.一些英文審稿意見的模板【轉】 來源： Elaine 王倩的日志 最近導師讓我?guī)兔徚藘善⑽奈恼?，覺得寫的都不怎么樣，頓時覺得自己的也不太差吧嘿嘿。但是怎么寫評審還是有經驗需要學習，自己也不能寫的太不專業(yè)。不過我的意見也不過是給老師寫意見的一個參考，具體能不能過我就毋須多言了。網上找來一些零碎的資料參考參考。+1、目標和結果不清晰。It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular atte

2、ntion to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader.2、未解釋研究方法或解釋不充分。In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical methods used in the study.Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these va

3、rious experiments should be provided.3、對于研究設計的rationale:Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design.4、夸張地陳述結論/夸大成果/不嚴謹：The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not showif the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation

4、.5、對hypothesis的清晰界定：A hypothesis needs to be presented。6、對某個概念或工具使用的rationale/定義概念：What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio?7、對研究問題的定義：Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear,write one section to define the problem8、如何凸現(xiàn)原創(chuàng)性以及如何充分地寫literature review:The topic is novel

5、 but the application proposed is not so novel.9、對claim,如AB的證明，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、嚴謹度問題：MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to pro

6、ve that.11、格式（重視程度）：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 un

7、sure, 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、語言問題（出現(xiàn)最多的問題）：有關語言的審稿人意見：It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing payi

8、ng 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 sent

9、ences contain grammatical and/or spelling mistakes or are not complete sentences.As presented, the writing is not acceptable for the journal. There are problems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction.The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We strong

10、ly suggest that you obtain assistance from a colleague who is well-versed in English or whose native language is English.Please have someone competent in the English language and the subject matter of your paper go over the paper and correct it ?the quality of English needs improving. 作為審稿人，本不應該把編輯部

11、的這些信息公開（冒風險啊），但我覺得有些意見值得廣大投稿人注意，就貼出來吧，當然，有關審稿人的名字，Email，文章題名信息等就都刪除了，以免造成不必要的麻煩！希望朋友們多評價，其他有經驗的審稿人能常來指點大家！國人一篇文章投Mater.類知名國際雜志，被塞爾維亞一審稿人打25分！個人認為文章還是有一些創(chuàng)新的，所以作為審稿人我就給了66分，（這個分正常應該足以發(fā)表），提了一些修改意見，望作者修改后發(fā)表！登錄到編輯部網頁一看，一個文章竟然有六個審稿人，詳細看了下打的分數(shù)，60分大修，60分小修，66分（我），25分拒，（好家伙，竟然打25分，有魄力），拒但沒有打分（另一國人審），最后一個沒有回來

12、！兩個拒的是需要我們反思和學習的?。ɡㄌ栃斌w內容為我注解）Reviewer 4Reviewer Recommendation Term: RejectOverall Reviewer Manuscript Rating: 25Comments to Editor: Reviewers are required to enter their name, affiliation and e-mail address below. Please note this is for administrative purposes and will not be seen by the author.Ti

13、tle (Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.): Prof.Name: XXXAffiliation: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxManuscript entitled Synthesis XXX。 it has been synthesized with a number of different methods and in a variety of forms. This manuscript does not bring any new knowledge or data on materials property and therefore only c

14、ontribution may be in novel preparation method, still this point is not elaborated properly (see Remark 1). Presentation and writing is rather poor; there are several statements not supported with data (for some see Remarks 2) and even some flaws (see Remark 3). For these reasons I suggest to reject

15、 paper in the present form.1. The paper describes a new method for preparation of XXXX, but:- the new method has to be compared with other methods for preparation of XXXXpowders (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussion),（通常的寫作格式，審稿人實際上很在意的）- it has to be described why thi

16、s method is better or different from other methods, (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussion),- it has to be added in the manuscript what kind of XXXXXX by other methods compared to this novel one (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussion),- it

17、has to be outlined what is the benefit of this method (ABSTRACT, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS).（很多人不會寫這個地方，大家多學習啊）2. When discussing XRD data XXXauthors- state that XXXXX- state that XXXX- This usually happens with increasing sintering time, but are there any data to present, density, particle size?（很多人用XRD，結果圖放上去就什么都