Redian新闻
>
问个 Neurobiology of Aging revision的问题
avatar
问个 Neurobiology of Aging revision的问题# Biology - 生物学
l*r
1
好像报offer的不少啊
avatar
c*y
2
有哪家保险公司卖这类保险的么?怕有个万一什么的
avatar
h*o
3
文章被reject了,但同时说可以revision.
3个reviewer的comments
Reviewer1: In this manuscript the authors used an elegant approach to
determine the effects of XXX in a mouse model of Alzheimer disease. 然后概
括了我们study 的内容。
This is a well conducted study and the data presented are of high quality
and clearly support the authors' conclusions. I believe that the findings
are important and the manuscript is nicely organized and carefully crafted.
I have only two minor suggestions to improve the paper further. 然后提了2个
小问题,而且还是我们自己的typo造成的。
Reviewer 2:同样概括了我们的主要findings。 Despite the fact that the
manuscript contains potential new and interesting information, there are
several points that need to be addressed
然后要一堆额外的数据 主要是想要我们再加一个不同的treatment组 , 因为这个
study是个long term 的in vivostudy,不可能在增加一个。
Reviewer 3: Overall this is a very interesting and seemingly well-done paper
. The effects of XXX treatment are particularly interesting. It advances
the literature and will be of interest to many although there are some minor
criticisms/comments/questions about the work that can be ignored, addressed
, or refuted. 然后提了一些小建议,改改文字就可以了
现在头疼这第二个reviewer,基本上是不可能重新在做一个long term 的实验增加一个
treatment组了,想问问看这种情况还有希望能revise过去被接收吗?
谢谢
avatar
TN
4
平均一天没有一个,很多么?

【在 l*********r 的大作中提到】
: 好像报offer的不少啊
avatar
h*u
5


quality
findings
crafted.

Are you able to use review 1 and 3's comments against review2's? so that
you can talk to editor (on the phone) to agree on all the other revisions
except the new treatment experiments.

【在 h*******o 的大作中提到】
: 文章被reject了,但同时说可以revision.
: 3个reviewer的comments
: Reviewer1: In this manuscript the authors used an elegant approach to
: determine the effects of XXX in a mouse model of Alzheimer disease. 然后概
: 括了我们study 的内容。
: This is a well conducted study and the data presented are of high quality
: and clearly support the authors' conclusions. I believe that the findings
: are important and the manuscript is nicely organized and carefully crafted.
: I have only two minor suggestions to improve the paper further. 然后提了2个
: 小问题,而且还是我们自己的typo造成的。

avatar
D*a
6
关键是你reject那封信的内容,是怎么说的
现在很多杂志一看到要补实验的comment就reject,但是会明确说如果能回答这些问题
欢迎重新投,其实就是个花招减少received 和 accepted 之间的gap就是了
看你的comment都停positive的,即使2也说了potential new and interesting
information,我觉得挺有希望的。不能做就说明为什么觉得没必要就是了,或者做点
相关实验减少下他的疑虑
相关阅读
logo
联系我们隐私协议©2024 redian.news
Redian新闻
Redian.news刊载任何文章,不代表同意其说法或描述,仅为提供更多信息,也不构成任何建议。文章信息的合法性及真实性由其作者负责,与Redian.news及其运营公司无关。欢迎投稿,如发现稿件侵权,或作者不愿在本网发表文章,请版权拥有者通知本网处理。