目次
目次
ついにRevision
ど、ど、どうしましょう
論文を投稿した場合の返答のパターン
①Accept
そのまま採択です。論文掲載おめでとうございます。一流雑誌ではまずありません。
②Minor Revision
若干修正したら通ります。ほぼOK！
③Major revision
大幅に修正しましょう。首の皮一枚つながっています。
④Reject
却下です。一流雑誌の採択率は10％以下です。これが普通なのできにしません。
ふつうは④Rejectです。つぎにいきましょう①の一発acceptはまずありません。
期待しすぎないようにしてください。
ほぼ、③のMajor revisionで④Minorならばラッキーです。
今回の記事は③あるいは④への返答の方法を説明します。
Revisionの極意
①Revisionには全集中
ここからが真の勝負のはじまりです。ここまでくればアクセプトまでワンチャンスあります。
なにか査読者の心には反応があったということです。厳しいコメントも多くつらい日々ですが、がんばりましょう。
②編集者、査読者に最大限の敬意を払う
査読は基本ボランティアです。貴重な時間をいただいております。提案は真摯にうけとめ
ひとつひとつ丁寧に返答しましょう。
③我慢が大切。要求どおり修正しましょう
時に査読者が誤解していたり、こちらの意図がうまくつたわりにくいこともあります。
そんなときもキレずに我慢です。
Replyの具体的な書き方
Dear Editors and Reviewers
Thank you very much for reviewing our manuscript and offering valuable advice.
We have addressed your comments with point-by-point responses, and revised the manuscript accordingly.
Responses to the Comments by the Associate editor:
1. EUS-FNA is often performed as a diagnostic procedure. Since the authors discussed the role of xxx in cases with negative EUS-FNA, data on the incremental increase by xxx should be provided. The incremental increase by adding contrast enhancement EUS to non-enhanced EUS was recently reported (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;18:917-925).
Reply:
Thank you very much for your excellent suggestion. There were xxx cases with negative EUS-FNA findings in the present study. According to your excellent suggestion, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC of xxx parameters to diagnose pancreatic carcinoma and added a new table (Table x) to the revised manuscript. In cases with negative EUS-FNA findings, late phase hypoenhancement was the most accurate of the eight parameters. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC were xxx%, xxx%, xxx%, and xxx using xxx, respectively. Highly accurate diagnosis could be achieved even in cases with negative EUS-FNA findings; therefore, we conclude that xxx has a complementary role to EUS-FNA. We have added text to the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections and cited the recommended article (Page 5, Lines 99; Page 9, Lines 214-217; Page 9, Lines 236-238).
14. Buxbaum J, Ko C, Varghese N, et al. Qualitative and Quantitative Contrast-enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasound Improves Evaluation of Focal Pancreatic Lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020; 18: 917-25.e4.
Responses to the Comments by the reviewer 1:
…
Responses to the Comments by the reviewer 2:
…
Replyの作法
1. まずお礼
Dear Editors and Reviewers
Thank you very much for reviewing our manuscript and offering valuable advice.
We have addressed your comments with point-by-point responses, and revised the manuscript accordingly.
２. Responses to the Comments by the associate editor:と書く
次にReviewer1、2と続けます。
３. 質問内容はイタリック
みやすくするために質問をイタリックにしました。
４. 返事は色をかえると見やすい。
Replyの字色は紫にしました。目に優しく、権威性のある色です。
5. 返事の構成
①お礼の一言
Thank you very much for your excellent suggestion.
②修正したこと
There were xxx cases with negative EUS-FNA findings in the present study. According to your excellent suggestion, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC of xxx parameters to diagnose pancreatic carcinoma and added a new table (Table x) to the revised manuscript.
③新たな結果
In cases with negative EUS-FNA findings, late phase hypoenhancement was the most accurate of the eight parameters. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC were xxx%, xxx%, xxx%, and xxx using xxx, respectively.
④新たな結果の解釈
The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC were xxx%, xxx%, xxx%, and xxx using xxx, respectively. Highly accurate diagnosis could be achieved even in cases with negative EUS-FNA findings; therefore, we conclude that xxx has a complementary role to EUS-FNA.
⑤そしてどこに追加したかを書く。
We have added text to the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections and cited the recommended article (Page 5, Lines 99; Page 9, Lines 214-217; Page 9, Lines 236-238).
⑥引用の依頼が有ればそれも書く。
14. Buxbaum J, Ko C, Varghese N, et al. Qualitative and Quantitative Contrast-enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasound Improves Evaluation of Focal Pancreatic Lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020; 18: 917-25.e4.
6. お礼の一言シリーズ
Major comment に対して
Thank you very much for your excellent suggestion.
Thank you very much for your invaluable comments.
Thank you very much for your important comments.
Thank you very much for your helpful comments.
Thank you for your recommendation.
Thank you very much for your helpful recommendations.
We apologize for our insufficient explanation regarding use of 名詞
We apologize for our insufficient explanation of 名詞
Minor commentに対して
Thank you for your comment.
Thank you for your recommendation
Thank you for your helpful recommendation.
We apologize for our unclear description of 名詞
Thank you for your kind suggestion.
Thank you for your help.
まとめ
どれだけきっちり、誠実に情熱的に返すかが、Replyのコツです。私がかつての上司からいただいた言葉は、
Replyは、「美しく、読みやすく、熱く、論理的に書くのが大切」
ということです。参考になりますと幸いです。
参考書籍
１．必ずアクセプトされる医学英語論文 完全攻略50の鉄則
Revisonの極意（P163-170）にかかれており参考になります。
２．時間がなくても、お金がなくても、英語が苦手でも、
論文を書く技法―臨床医による臨床医のための3Step論文作成術
Revisionの豊富な具体例と役立つテクニックがP.107-112にかかれています。
関連記事