以下12点无轻重主次之分。每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成。
1、目标和结果不清晰。
It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with experti in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and ntence 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 me
thods ud in the study.
◆ Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did the various experiments
should be provided.
3、对于研究设计的rationale:
日本留学中介 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
example什么意思 if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation.我自己英语
5、对hypothesis的清晰界定：
会计证调转手续
A hypothesis needs to be prented。
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 t the problem discusd in this paper in more clear,
write one ction to define the problem
8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review:
The topic is novel but the application propod is not so novel.
9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification:
材料科学与工程专业就业前景 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 clo 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 formatt
ed. If you are unsure, plea 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 experti in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and ntence 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 rvice before submission; only then can a proper review be performed. Most ntences contain grammatical and/or spelling mistakes or are not complete ntences.
◆ As prented, the writing is not acceptable for the journal. There are pro
blems with ntence structure, verb ten, and clau construction.
雅思词汇下载
◆ The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We str
ongly suggest that you obtain assistance from a colleague who is well-verd i
n English or who native language is English.
◆ Plea have someone competent in the English language and the subject matte
r of your paper go over the paper and correct it. ?
chastitybelt◆ the quality of English needs improving.
来自编辑的鼓励：
Encouragement from reviewers:
展示设计培训◆ I would be very glad to re-review the paper in greater depth once it has be
en edited becau the subject is interesting.
◆ There is continued interest in your manuscript titled "……" which you subm
itted to the Journal of Biomedical Materials Rearch: Part B - Applied Biomat
erials.
◆ 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: ******
completely
Materials Science and Engineering
Dear Dr. ******,
Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will e that they are advising that you revi your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be plead to reconsider my decision.
For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below.
Reviewer #1: This work propos an extensive review on micromulsion-bad methods for the synthesis of Ag nanoparticles. As such, the matter is of interest, however the paper suffers for two rious limits:
earl1) the overall quality of the English language is rather poor;
2) some Figures must be lected from previous literature to discuss also the synthesis of anisotropically shaped Ag nanoparticles (there are veral examples published), which has been largely overlooked throughout the paper. ;
