英文论文审稿专家模板review report reform
(完整版)一些英文审稿意见及回复的模板(可编辑修改word版)
一些英文审稿意见的模板最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个 major revision 后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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 methods 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。
一些英文审稿意见的模板
最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个major revision后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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 methods 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 showif 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。
完整版一些英文审稿意见及回复的模板
完美格式整理版一些英文审稿意见的模板最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个major revision后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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 methods 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 showif 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。
（完整版）一些英文审稿意见及回复的模板（可编辑修改word版）
（完整版）一些英文审稿意见及回复的模板（可编辑修改word版）一些英文审稿意见的模板最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个major revision 后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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 methods 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。
英文审稿意见范文
英文审稿意见范文English:The content of this article is overall well-organized and well-researched. However, there are a few areas that need to be improved. Firstly, the introduction should provide a clearer roadmap for the article and clearly state the research question or objective. Additionally, the literature review section could benefit from a deeper analysis and synthesis of existing research. It is important to not just summarize the existing literature, but also to critically evaluate and compare different studies. Furthermore, the methodology section needs to clearly outline the research methods and justify the chosen approach. It is crucial for the readers to understand how the research was conducted in order to assess the validity of the findings. Lastly, the conclusion needs to effectively summarize the key findings and their implications. It should also point out any limitations of the study and suggest directions for future research.Translated content:这篇文章的内容总体上组织得很好，研究也很充分。
(完整版)一些英文审稿意见及回复的模板
一些英文审稿意见的模板最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个major revision后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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 methods 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 showif 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。
英文正面的审稿意见范文
英文正面的审稿意见范文Thank you for submitting your manuscript for review.After careful consideration, I have provided the following feedback on your work:1. The overall structure of the manuscript is well organized and the introduction provides a clear outline of the research topic and its significance.2. The literature review is comprehensive andeffectively integrates existing research to support the study's rationale. However, I suggest revising the sectionto provide a more critical analysis of the literature and clearly identify the research gap.3. The methodology section is well-detailed and providesa clear explanation of the research design, data collection, and analysis procedures. However, I recommend providing a rationale for the selected methodology and addressing potential limitations.4. The results are presented clearly and are relevant to the research questions. However, I suggest providing more detailed descriptions of the findings and using visual aids,such as tables or graphs, to enhance the presentation of the data.5. The discussion effectively interprets the results and relates them to the existing literature. However, I recommend expanding the discussion to address the implications of the findings and their significance for the broader field of study.6. The conclusion effectively summarizes the keyfindings and their implications. However, I suggestrevising the conclusion to provide a more concise and impactful closing statement.In summary, the manuscript has a strong foundation and addresses an important research topic. However, I recommend revising certain sections to enhance the clarity and impact of the study. I appreciate the opportunity to review your work and look forward to seeing the revised manuscript.中文回答：感谢您提交您的手稿进行审阅。
英文论文审稿意见英文版
英文论文审稿意见汇总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 methods 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 showif 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 problem8、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 problems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction.◆The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We strongly 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.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 been edited because the subject is interesting.◆There is continued interest in your manuscript titled "……" which you submitted to the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research: Part B - Applied Biomaterials.◆The Submission has been greatly improved and is worthy of publication.老外写的英文综述文章的审稿意见Ms. Ref. No.: ******Title: ******Materials Science and EngineeringDear Dr. ******,Reviewers have now commented on your paper. 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。
专家审稿意见英文范文
专家审稿意见英文范文Certainly! A sample expert review comment in English could be structured as follows:**Expert Review Comment***Manuscript Title: [Title of the Manuscript]***Reviewer Identification:**- **Name:** [Reviewer's Name]- **Affiliation:** [Reviewer's Institution/Organization]- **Email:** [Reviewer's Contact Email]**General Evaluation:**The submitted manuscript demonstrates a commendable effort in addressing the subject matter, providing valuable insights into [topic area]. The study design, methodology, and execution are largely robust and contribute significantly to the existing body of knowledge in this field.**Strengths:**1. **Rigorous Methodology:** The methodology employed in this research is thorough and well-structured, ensuring reliability and validity in the findings.2. **Clear Presentation:** The manuscript is presented coherently, with clear articulation of objectives, methods, results, and discussions, facilitating easy comprehension for readers.3. **Significance and Cont ribution:** The study’s contribution to the field is notable, particularly in [specific area], offering valuable implications for [relevant stakeholders].**Areas for Improvement:**1. **Statistical Analysis:** Further elaboration on the statistical analysis methods used, including assumptions and limitations, would strengthen the robustness of the findings.2. **Discussion Depth:** While the discussion is insightful, deeper exploration and contextualization of certain findings in relation to existing literature would enhance the manuscript's overall impact.3. **Clarity in Results Presentation:** Simplifying certain technical aspects in the results section would improve accessibility for a broader readership.**Recommendations:**1. I recommend a more detailed statistical analysis, perhaps incorporating additional tests or models, to bolster the study's credibility.2. To enhance the manuscript’s impact, integrating comparative analyses with other relevant studies or frameworks could provide broader context and depth.3. Considering the audience diversity, a revision towards simplifying complex technical jargon would make the content more accessible without compromising depth.**Conclusion:**Overall, the manuscript holds substantial promise and contributes significantly to the field. Addressing the suggested improvements would elevate its impact and readability, further solidifying its position as a valuable addition to the existing literature on [subject area].This type of expert review comment aims to provide constructive feedback while acknowledging the strengths of the submitted manuscript, helping authors refine their work for publication or further research.。
一些英文审稿意见的模板
最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个major revision后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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 methods 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 showif 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。
一些英文审稿意见的模板
之马矢奏春创作最近在审一篇英文稿, 第一次做这个工作, 还有点不知如何表达.幸亏遇上我的童贞审稿, 我想不会枪毙它的, 给他一个major revision后接收吧.呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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沛.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 various experiments should be provided.3、对研究设计的rationale:Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design.4、夸张地陈说结论/夸年夜功效/不严谨：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.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/界说概念：What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio?7、对研究问题的界说：Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear,write one section to define the problem8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充沛地写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（重视水平）：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 materialis 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（呈现最多的问题）：有关语言的审稿人意见：It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing bysomeone 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 problems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction.The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We strongly 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 andthe subject matter of your paper go over the paper and correct it ?the quality of English needs improving.作为审稿人, 本不应该把编纂部的这些信息公开（冒风险啊）, 但我觉得有些意见值得广年夜投稿人注意,就贴出来吧, 固然, 有关审稿人的名字, Email, 文章题名信息等就都删除,以免造成不需要的麻烦！希望朋友们多评价, 其他有经验的审稿人能常来指点年夜家！国人一篇文章投Mater.类知名国际杂志,被塞尔维亚一审稿人打25分！个人认为文章还是有一些立异的,所以作为审稿人我就给了66分, （这个分正常应该足以发表）, 提了一些修改意见, 望作者修改后发表！登录到编纂部网页一看, 一个文章竟然有六个审稿人,详细看了下打的分数, 60分年夜修, 60分小修, 66分（我）, 25分拒, （好家伙, 竟然打25分, 有魄力）, 拒但没有打分（另一国人审）, 最后一个没有回来！两个拒的是需要我们反思和学习的！（括号斜体内容为我注解）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.Title (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 contribution may be in novel preparation method,still this point is not elaborated properly (see Remark 1). Presentation and writing is rather poor; there areseveral statements not supported with data (for some see Remarks 2) and even some flaws (see Remark 3). For these reasons I suggest to reject 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 methodsfor preparation of XXXXpowders (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussion),（通常的写作格式, 审稿人实际上很在意的）- it has to be described why this 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 has to be outlined what is the benefit of this method (ABSTRACT, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS). （很多人不会写这个处所, 年夜家多学习啊）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, 结果图放上去就什么都不论了, 这是不应该的）3. When discussing luminescence measurements authorswrite "XXXXXIf there is second harmonic in excitation beam it will stay there no matter what type of material one investigates（研究了什么）4.英语写作要提高（这条很多人的软肋, 年夜家努力啊）Reviewer 5Reviewer Recommendation Term: RejectOverall Reviewer Manuscript Rating: N/AComments to Editor:Title (Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.)rof.Name:（国人）Affiliation: XXXXXXXXxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxDear editor:Thank you for inviting me to evaluate the article titled "XXXX“. In this paper, the authors investigated the influences of sintering condition on the crystalstructure and XXXXXX, However, it is difficult for us to understand the manuscript because of poor English being used.The text is not well arranged and the logic is not clear. Except English writing, there are many mistakes in the manuscript and the experimental results don't show good and new results. So I recommend to you that this manuscript can not be accepted. The following are the questions and some mistakes in this manuscript:（看看总体评价, 不达标, 很多人被这样郁闷了, 固然审稿人也有他的事理）1. TheXXXXXXX. However, this kind material had been investigated since 1997 as mentioned in the author's manuscript, and similar works had been published in similar journals. What are the novel findings in thepresent work? The synthesis method and luminescence properties reported in this manuscript didn't supply enough evidence to support the prime novelty statement. （这位作者好猛, 竟然翻出自己1997年的中文文章翻译了一边就敢投国际知名杂志, 而且没有新的立异！朋友们也看到了, 一稿多发, 中文, 英文双版发表在网络时代太难了, 运气欠好审稿人也是国人, 敢情曾看过你的文章, 所以必死无疑, 这位作者老兄就命运差了, 刚好被审稿人看见, 所以毫无疑问被拒, （呵呵, 我97年刚上初一没见到这个文章, 哈哈））2. In page 5, the author mentioned that: "XXXX Based on our knowledge, "sintering" describes the process when the powders become ceramics. So, I think the word "synthesis" should be better instead of "sintering" here. Second, the XRD patterns didn't show obvious difference between three "sintering" temperatures of 700, 800 and 900 ?C.（作者老兄做工作太不仔细了, 虫子们可别犯啊）3. Also in the page X, the author mentioned that: XXX.......... However, the author didn't supply the morphologies of particles at different synthesizing temperatures. What are the experimental results or the references which support the author's conclusion that the创作时间：二零二一年六月三十日XXXX properties would be influenced by the particle size? （作者仍在瞎说, 这个问题我也指出了, 不单我还是看着国人的份上让修改, 添加很多工具, 说实话, 文章看的很累很累）4. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX However, to my knowledge, after the milling, the particles size will be decreased exactly, but how and what to destroy the host structure?（虫子们自己注意）5. XXX on the vertical axis of the XRD patterns was meaningless, because author add several patterns in one figure. It is obvious that these spectra are not measured by ordinary methods. （都是老问题, 不说了）创作时间：二零二一年六月三十日。
一些英文审稿意见的模板【转】
一些英文审稿意见的模板【转】最近在审一篇英文稿第一次做这个工作还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿我想不会枪毙它的给他一个major revision后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
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 methods 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。
sci专家审稿意见英文范文
sci专家审稿意见英文范文Dear [Editor's Name],。
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the manuscript titled "[Manuscript Title]" by [Authors' Names]. After carefully evaluating the study, I have several comments and suggestions that I believe will enhance the quality and impact of the manuscript.1. Significance and Originality:The manuscript addresses an important issue in [field of study], and the research question is clearly stated. However, I suggest the authors provide a more comprehensive literature review to establish the novelty and significance of their work. Additionally, it would be beneficial to highlight the unique contributions of this study compared to existing research.2. Methodology and Analysis:The methodology employed in this study is appropriate for addressing the research question. However, I recommend the authors provide more detailed information about the sample size, data collection procedures, and statistical analysis techniques used. This will enable readers to better evaluate the validity and reliability of the findings.3. Results and Discussion:The results section should be presented in a clear and concise manner. It would be helpful if the authors include tables, figures, or graphs to visually represent the data. Furthermore, the discussion should not only summarize the findings but also provide a thorough interpretation and analysis of the results in relation to the research question. The authors should also address any limitations or potential biases in their study.4. Language and Clarity:The manuscript is generally well-written, but there are some areas that could benefit from improvement. The authors should carefully proofread the manuscript for grammatical errors and ensure that the language is clear and concise throughout. Additionally, I suggest reorganizing certain sections to enhance the flow and logical progression of ideas.5. Conclusion:The manuscript would benefit from a stronger and more impactful conclusion. The authors should summarize the main findings, restate the significance of the study, and provide suggestions for future research directions. It is important to avoid making any unsupported claims or overgeneralizations in the conclusion.Overall, this manuscript has the potential to make a valuable contribution to the field of [field of study]. However, I recommend that the authors address the aforementioned points to improve the clarity, rigor, and overall quality of the manuscript.Thank you once again for allowing me to review this manuscript. I look forward to seeing the revised version.Sincerely,。
(完整版)一些英文审稿意见及回复的模板(可编辑修改word版)
一些英文审稿意见的模板最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。
幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个 major revision 后接收吧。
呵呵网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++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 methods 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。
英文审稿意见模板
英文审稿意见模板Dear [Reviewer's Name],Thank you for reviewing our manuscript titled [Title of the Manuscript]. We appreciate your time and effort in providing us with valuable feedback. Your comments and suggestions have greatly helped to improve the quality of our work. We are grateful for your expertise in this field and for the constructive criticism you have provided.We have carefully considered all of your comments and have made the necessary revisions to address each of the concerns raised. Below, we summarize the changes we have made in response to your suggestions:1. [Comment 1]: In response to this comment, we have revised our introduction to provide a clearer context for our study. We have also included additional references to support the background information and clarify the research gap.2. [Comment 2]: We agree with your suggestion to expand the methodology section. We have provided additional details on the experimental setup, data collection, and analysis techniques used. This should provide a more comprehensive understanding of our research methodology.3. [Comment 3]: Thank you for pointing out this error in our results section. We have carefully reviewed our data and made the necessary corrections. The updated results now accurately reflect our findings.4. [Comment 4]: We appreciate your suggestion to include a discussion on the limitations of our study. We have added a new section to the manuscript that discusses the possible limitations of our methodology and potential areas for future research.Overall, we believe that these revisions have significantly strengthened our manuscript. We are confident that the updated version meets the requirements for publication.Once again, we would like to express our gratitude for your thorough review of our manuscript and for providing us with valuable feedback. We believe that your expertise has greatly contributed to the overall improvement of our work.Thank you once again for your time and for considering our manuscript for publication. We look forward to your final decision. Sincerely,[Your Name][Your Affiliation][Contact Information]。
审稿意见英文范文
审稿意见英文范文Subject: Review of [Paper Title]Dear Editor,I've had the pleasure (well, sort of) of reading the manuscript titled "[Paper Title]" by [Authors]. Here are my thoughts:1. Overall Impression.The paper is like a box of chocolates there are some really good bits, but also a few that leave a bit of a strange taste in your mouth. The topic is quite interesting and relevant in the field. It's like they've chosen a well traveled road but with their own little twists and turns. However, the presentation could use some serious sprucing up.2. Strengths.Novelty: The authors do a decent job of bringing in some new ideas.It's like they've found a new path in a well explored forest. Their proposed method has the potential to be a game changer if it can be fully developed. For example, the way they combine [specific concepts] is quite clever and makes me think, "Hey, why didn't I think of that?"Data: The data they present seems solid. It's like building a house on a fairly stable foundation. They've clearly put in some effort to collect and analyze it, and the statistical analysis seems appropriate. It gives their arguments some real weight.3. Weaknesses.Clarity: This is a biggie. It's like trying to read a map drawn by a drunk pirate. The paper jumps around a lot, and it's not always clear howone section relates to another. For instance, when they move from the theoretical background to the experimental part, it's like a sudden leapinto the unknown. They need to add more signposts to guide the reader through their thought process.Literature Review: It feels a bit skimpy. It's like they've onlyglanced at the books on the top shelf of the library. They need to dig deeper and engage more with the existing literature. There are some important works that they seem to have overlooked, and this makes their contribution seem a bit less significant than it could be.Methodology: There are some holes in their methodology that need patching up. It's like a leaky boat it might still float, but not very well. They need to be more explicit about certain assumptions they've made and how they've controlled for certain variables.4. Recommendations.Rewrite for Clarity: The authors should take a red pen (or the digital equivalent) and go through the paper line by line to make it more coherent. They could start by creating a clear outline and then make sure eachsection follows the logical flow. It's like giving their paper a makeover a much needed one.Expand Literature Review: They need to hit the books (or the online databases) again and do a more comprehensive review. This will not only strengthen their argument but also show that they really understand the context of their work.Tighten Methodology: Plug those holes in the methodology. Be more detailed and precise. It's like fixing the engine of a car it'll make the whole thing run much smoother.In conclusion, the paper has potential, but it needs some serious work before it can be considered for publication. It's like a diamond in the rough with some cutting and polishing, it could shine.Best regards,[Your Name]。
(最新整理)英文评审Review模版
(完整)英文评审Review模版编辑整理：尊敬的读者朋友们：这里是精品文档编辑中心，本文档内容是由我和我的同事精心编辑整理后发布的，发布之前我们对文中内容进行仔细校对，但是难免会有疏漏的地方，但是任然希望（(完整)英文评审Review模版）的内容能够给您的工作和学习带来便利。
同时也真诚的希望收到您的建议和反馈，这将是我们进步的源泉，前进的动力。
本文可编辑可修改，如果觉得对您有帮助请收藏以便随时查阅，最后祝您生活愉快业绩进步，以下为(完整)英文评审Review模版的全部内容。
This paper presents an equivalent thermal test method for the spacecraft single phase fluid loop radiator，and builds up an experiment system for validation. The work is meaningful to the aerospace industry，but there are some modifications。
(1)The authors represent the equivalent thermal test method is under normal pressure,but the difference to the thermal test between the normal pressure and the environment in the spacecraft is not given. Does the pressure influence the experiment results?The authors had better give some explains;(2)Since the issue is not secretive， the authors had better give the structures ofthe experiment set. If there is some limits， the authors should tell the details instead of the sketch shown in Fig。