换个角度,作为一个审稿人是怎么审论文的?

这些年自己也审过不少稿件,通过审稿其实可以在一定水平上提高自己的论文写作水平,为什么这么说呢?

换个角度,作为一个审稿人是怎么审论文的?

有句话叫:当局者迷,旁观者清

大家应该都有这样的感受,自己写的论文的时候,怎么看怎么喜欢,反复的看也看不出什么问题,觉得自己写的很完美。

这就像很多小哥哥小姐姐对着镜子看自己,怎么看怎么帅,怎么看怎么美。。。

这就是为什么我经常说写好的论文要多给几个人看看,因为你自己是一个当局者,很难找到自己论文的问题所在,因为在你的认知里你觉得这个就应该是这么写的,但是实际上你的部分认知是错的,或者有部分知识在你的脑子里是没有的,也就是知识储备不足。

为什么审稿能够提高你的论文写作水平呢?

因为作为审稿人,实际上你是处在一个旁观者的角度,鸡蛋里挑骨头的事情其实我们很多人干起来都特别容易,在你审阅别人稿件的时候,如果你是一个负责任的审稿人,为了对别人的论文负责,你会去补充一些平时不怎么去学习的知识,然后用这些知识去挑别人论文的刺,这时候你会很容易发现一些问题,而这些问题在你以后自己写论文的时候你就会知道去避免。

那么作为审稿人一般都看些什么呢?

1. 创新性和立题意义

这个是审稿人首先要判断的内容,既然是科学研究,如果没有创新,没有实际意义,那这篇论文肯定是没有价值的,如果有意义,那么审稿的时候一般就会明确指出这篇论文的价值。比如下面的审稿意见就给出了正面的评论,指出这个研究是很有意思的,对于肌肉骨骼的细胞疗法和软骨修复有很广泛的影响。

SIGNIFICANCE
This study advances the interesting concept that Low Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound (LIPUS) may promote the healing effects of MSCs in a rat model for cartilage repair. Mechanistically, the authors provide evidence that LIPUS has concomitant stimulatory effects on cell migration and autophagy. As such, the findings of this study could have broad impact on musculoskeletal cell therapies and in particular cartilage healing.

2. 研究方案

创新如果没有问题,那么下面的审稿就是要看论文的研究方案是否能够证明研究者提出的问题,也就是审研究方案的合理性和严谨性,有没有重大的原则性缺陷。比如:

(1)有些效应必须要在动物实验里证明才能显的完整,但是论文只有细胞实验,而没有动物实验。

(2)缺少几个关键指标的验证。

(3)没有用过表达和沉默技术的来证明某个信号通路。

(4)只有数据分析,缺少临床验证,这个在生信文章中比较多见。

这种情况审稿人一般会提出要求补实验的要求。

3. 方法学

方法学包括实验方法和统计方法,另外还包括作图方法,比如自噬的研究,一般要用电镜、免疫荧光和Western-blot三个实验方法来一起验证,如果你只做了一个Western-blot,那么实际上就是方法学上的不足。还有的需要用图片来展示结果,你没有作图,或者你作的图不对,一些结果可以在同一张图上面展示,你却分开展示,那么也是方法学的不足。

另外对于临床研究和Meta分析这种文章,审稿会特别关注统计学方法部分,这个时候如果你对统计知识的掌握不足,你可能就看不出论文存在的问题,这也倒逼审稿人自己去学习统计学的知识,但是其实很多时候,我们收到的审稿意见很少有指出统计学问题的,这不一定意味着你的统计学方法没有任何问题,可能是因为审稿人统计知识储备不够没有看出来。所以现在很多期刊会专门邀请一个统计学专家来参与同行评议,比如《Osteoarthritis and Cartilage》这个杂志就会有1个统计学专家专门提出统计学方法的意见。

像下面这个审稿意见就是统计学专家提的,非常的详细,大家可以看看自己的论文有没有同样的问题。

Reviewer #2: Statistical comments:
General comments. Much more detailed description of the study design, including sample size in each group of each experiment and description of how animals and/or samples from animals were allocated to the experiments and experimental groups are needed before a statistical review can be done.
Specific comments:
1. Abstract, results. Please provide results, i.e. numerical summaries of the data to support the given statements. Between-group differences of interest with adequate confidence intervals are preferable.
Methods.
2. Rabbits. Please describe how many rabbits were included in each experimental group and how the animals were allocated to the groups (for example computer program for randomization?).
3. The in vitro experiment. Please describe how the cartilage samples were distributed between the experimental groups, including information if samples from any animal were used more then once in one group or in several groups. This information is needed for both dose-finding phase and the final experiment with 5 groups.
4. A similar comment applies to the PPARgamma experiments.
5. For most of the experiments/groups described there is no information on the sample size. Please include this information together with motivation for why a specific sample size was chosen.
6. Were all samples included in this study coming from the 30 rabbits mentioned at the beginning of the methods section? Please clarify.
Statistical methods.
7. Please explain what "performed in triplicate" means. Please also describe how the results from those "triplicates" were handled in the statistical analysis.
8. For each experiment the authors need to describe the study design in detail, so that the sample size and the potential dependence of the data points are clear.
9. For all the statistical models fitted, the authors need to describe the outcome variable, the independent variables, how the assumptions of the chosen model were checked (residual diagnostics are typical for ANOVA and alike models) and if they were fulfilled.
10. Please describe how relative expressions were estimated and analysed.
11. Please note that statistical significance is irrelevant, please see: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2019.1583913
Results.
12. It is great that the authors provide confidence intervals for the between group differences of interest, but also the information about the unit needs to be provided. For example, the CI in line 205 (for expression levels of proteoglycan) is from 0.27 to 0.76 - what is the unit of this? Please clarify for all the estimates reported.
13. All figures. Please show individual data points. Please show confidence intervals for the means instead of SE.
14. Figure 1B. On the y-axis there are relative values. This suggests that Student's t-test or ANOVA are most probably not suitable for analysis unless data are transformed and results back-transformed. I could not find any description of such procedures in the methods section. Please revise, expand the methods section to include all the details of data handing and analysis, so that an independent statistician could reproduce all the numbers if given the data. A similar comment applies to data in figure 4E, 3B-D, 2B-D.
15. Please provide simple descriptive data on the animals used, for example their weight during the weeks of the experiments.

4. 写作

写作这块就不用多说了,如果上面的3点没有原则性的错误,那么审稿就会挑写作的问题了,实际上如果前面3点通过了,只有写作的问题基本上就属于小修,等于告诉你只要你把论文写作好好改一下文章就接收了。

审稿的时候写作这一块主要看什么呢?

(1)格式和规范:是不是符合论文的写作规范,比如Meta分析有专门的PRISMA声明,如果你没有按照这个声明来写,那么就不符合Meta分析的写作规范。

(2)写作深度:各个部分的写作有没有达到一定的深度。

  • 前言有没有写当前国内外的研究不足,本研究的目的和意义,列举文献是否完整等等;
  • 方法部分有没有交代实验的细节,比如用了多少样本,试剂购自哪个公司,培养细胞的数量,抗体的名称等等;
  • 结果有没有客观描述,有没有遗漏重要的结果;
  • 讨论有没有按照SCI论文的要求针对每个结果进行深入讨论,有没有罗列既往的研究文献进行对比论证,有没有指出本研究的局限性等等。

(3)语言:对于SCI论文,审稿还需要看语言是不是正宗,语法是否有问题,有没有用错单词,当然了我们作为中国人去审英文稿件在这块可能有先天不足,这就要求我们平时要提高自己的英文写作水平,这样你才能看出别人的英文论文有没有语言的问题。

(4)小错误:有没有错别字和标点符号错误,有没有遗漏参考文献,图片有没有错误,比如缺标尺,缺参考线,缺标注等等。

比如下面的审稿意见:

The data in Figures 1, 3, and 5 and those in Figures 2, 4, and 6 are related and can be consolidated.
The word “inhibits” in Line 214 is a typo. Based on the results, it should be “enhances”.

最后总结下, 我们知道打仗的时候:知己知彼,才能百战百胜,当你知道一个审稿人是怎么审阅论文的时候,你带着审稿人的思维去设计自己的论文,写自己的论文,或者去看自己的论文,这样才能在投稿之前就能避免出现问题,从而提高自己的投稿命中率。


另外,有条件的也鼓励大家多参与审稿,虽然英文的审稿没有任何劳务费,但是在这其中是可以学到很多东西,最重要的是可以提高自己的论文写作水平。

版权声明:Robin 发表于 2022年2月26日 am7:20。
转载请注明:换个角度,作为一个审稿人是怎么审论文的? | 爱学术导航

相关文章

暂无评论

暂无评论...