How to reply to referees -SCI写作如何回复审稿人.pdf

SPECIAL ARTICLE How to reply to referees’ comments when submitting manuscripts for publication Hywel C. Williams, PhD Nottingham, United Kingdom Background: The publication of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals is a fairly complex and step- wise process that involves responding to referees’ comments. Little guidance is available in the biomedical literature on how to deal with such comments. Objective: The objective of this article is to provide guidance to novice writers on dealing with peer review comments in a way that maximizes the chance of subsequent acceptance. Methods: This will be a literature review and review of the author’s experience as a writer and referee. Results: Where possible, the author should consider revising and resubmitting rather than sending an article elsewhere. A structured layout for responding to referees’ comments is suggested that includes the 3 golden rules: (1) respond completely; (2) respond politely; and (3) respond with evidence. Conclusion: Responding to referees’ comments requires the writer to overcome any feelings of personal attack, and to instead concentrate on addressing referees’ concerns in a courteous, objective, and evidence- based way. (J Am Acad Dermatol 2004;51:79-83.)P lenty of guidance is available on conducting good research,1,2 and Web sites of most scien- tific journals give clear and helpful instructions on what is suitable for submission and how to submit. Yet where does one obtain guidance on replying to referees’ (peer reviewer) comments once the manuscript is returned? I could find little in the literature dealing with this important topic.3-7 This article attempts to address this gap by pro- viding some helpful tips on how to reply to referees’ comments. In the absence of any systematic research to determine which strategies are best in terms of acceptance rates, the tips suggested below are based simply on my personal experience of publishing approximately 200 articles, refereeing more than 50