一个“10个回复审稿人和编辑意见的小提示

转贴一个“10个回复审稿人和编辑意见的小提示Top10TipsforRespondingtoReviewerandEditorCommentsThomasM.Annesley*+AuthorAffiliationsUniversityofMichiganHealthSystem,AnnArbor,MI.↵*Addresscorrespondencetotheauthorat:UniversityofMichiganHealthSystem,RoomUH2G332,1500EastMedicalCenterDr.,AnnArbor,[e-mail],manyaspectsofourlivesinvolveareviewprocess.Incollege,yourprofessorswerereviewerswhoevaluatedandgradedyourwork.Whenyouapplyforaloan,thebankusesappraisersandaccountantstoreviewyourapplication.WhenaUSsenatorwritesanewpieceoflegislation,therearemanyotherreviewerswhowillwanttochangethedocument.Whenacompanywantstoapplyforapatent,anarmyofattorneysreviewstheapplicationtofindanyreasontodeclinetherequest.Soitshouldbenosurprisetoanyonewhosubmitsascientificpaperforpublicationthattheeditorandseveralreviewerswillnearlyalwaysfindproblemsorwanttoseechangesinthepaper.Itisanormalpartofthepathtopublication.Youcannotcontrolwhatthereviewerssay.Butyoucancontrolhowyourespondtotheircomments.SoherearemyTop10Tipstohelpyounavigatethroughtheresponseprocess.1.GetMad.ThenGetOverItTherarescientificpaperistheoneacceptedwithoutanyneedforrevision.So,asanauthoryoushouldexpectthatyoursubmittedpapers,iftheymakeitpastthefirstpeerreviewcycle,willrequiresomesortofmodificationtosatisfythecritiquesofthereviewers.Itisboththeeditor'sandthepeerreviewer'sjobtomakesure,onbehalfofthejournal,thatyourpaperisscientificallysound,factual,clear,complete,andoriginal.Todoso,theseindividualsmustoftenpointoutwhatiswrongwithyourpaper.Andforyouastheauthor,thathurts.Whenyouseethecriticismsthatthereviewershaveaboutyourpaper,goaheadandgetmad.Goaheadandventyourfrustrationtoacolleague.Thengetoveritbeforeyoutakeanyfutureactiontoreviseyourpaperandrespondtothereviewers.Poorjudgmentatthispointwillproduceapooroutcome.Respondingtoreviewercommentsinanargumentativefashionusuallydoesnothingbutpolarizetheopinionofeditorsandreviewersagainstyou.2.ConsiderWhattheEditor'sDecisionLetterReallySaysInnonacceptdecisionletters,editorsusuallysendamessageabouthowinterestedtheyareinseeingthisworkagain(seeExamplesbox).Iftheeditorhasdecidedtorejectyourpaper,asthefirstexampleshows,itisbesttojustacceptthedecisionandconsideranotherjournal.Somerejectionletters(Example2)offeranopportunitytoresubmit.Youstillhaveyourfootinthedoor,butyouneedtocarefullyconsiderwhetherthereisarealisticchancethatyoucanimprovethepapertothereviewers'satisfaction.Afterfindingnumerousdeficiencies,reviewerssometimesstopprovidingcommentsbecausetheirrecommendationsareclearbythetimetheyarepartwaythroughthepaper.Ifyoudecidetoresubmit,itispossiblethat(1)thereviewersalreadyhaveapoisonedviewoftheworkand(2)youwillreceiveadditionalcriticismsofyourworkwhenthereviewerslookatotherpartsofthepapertheydidnotreadcarefullyduringthefirstroundofreviews.Thethirdexampleisalsoarevise-and-resubmitletter,butittellsyouthatthepapershouldbeacceptableafteryouhavesatisfactorilyrespondedtothereviewers'comments.Inthatcase,itisinyourbestintereststoimprovethepaperandsenditbackwithminimaldelay.3.WaitandGatherYourThoughtsAfteryoureadthedecisionletterfromtheeditorandseethereviewers'comments,takeatleastadaytoallowyourselftoprocesswhatboththeeditorandreviewershavesaid.Thentakeafreshlookatthecommentstodeterminewhatthereviewerswanttoseeinarevisedpaper.Youcandevelopagameplanbycategorizingthereviewercomments,asfollows:(1)requestsforclarificationofexistingtext,additionoftexttofillaholeinthepaper,oradditionalexperimentaldetails;(2)requeststoreanalyze,reexpress,orreinterpretexistingdata;(3)requestsforadditionalexperimentsorfurtherproofofconcept;and(4)requestsyousimplycannotmeet.Seeingthespectrumofwhatyouneedtoaccomplishtoimprovethepaperhelpsyouprioritizeyourefforts.Ifadditionaldataanalysisorstatisticalanalysisisrequested,decidewhetheryouhavetheresourcestodosoorneedtosetupaconsultationwithaprofessionalstatistician.Ifadditionalexperimentsneedtobeperformed,begintodesignexperimentalprotocolsandtosettheminmotion.Iftherearereviewerrequeststhatyoucannotmeet,youneedtogatheryourthoughtshereaswell.Youneedtosatisfythereviewersomehow,sobegintodevelopalogicalexplanationforhoworwhythestudyisnotaffectedbyafailuretoincludewhatthereviewerrequested.ExamplesofDecisionLettersExample1.Rejection,donotresubmit.Yourpaperhasbeenexaminedby2expertreviewers.Unfortunately,wemustdeclinethismanuscriptforpublication.Thereasonsforthisdecisionareindicatedinthereviewers'comments.Example2.Declinedfornow,futureacceptancepossible.Yourpaperhasbeenexaminedby2expertreviewers.Forthereasonsexplainedinthecomments,wecannotacceptthismanuscriptforpublicationinClinicalChemistry.Wewouldconsiderarevisedversionthattakesthesecriticismsintoaccountbutcannotofferassurancethatsubmissionofarevisedmanuscriptwillleadtoacceptance.Example3.Declinedfornow,futureacceptanceverylikely.Yourpaperhasbeenexaminedby2expertreviewers.Asyouwillseeintheircomments,eachreviewerfindsmeritintheworkbutmakesconstructivesuggestions.Pleaseconsiderthesuggestionscarefully,asthechangeswillproduceanarticlethatbetterservesyouandourreaders.4.Even