【METHOD】How to write a review

linxingxing

5 |' E# n9 x' z2 v) D0 {% \

1 V( b( l4 W+ `; M2 RHow to Write and Structure Your Manuscript
" D8 `* \5 I6 }, t& hPatricia K Sonsalla, Ph.D.
+ @; i# y5 c1 m( PUMDNJ-RWJ Medical School Piscataway, NJ
- j% p, ?" J% r) E8 n/ x  `8 i! W' c
REFERENCES:
# _1 X  [: l. S: j* g# ~How to Write and Revise a Scientific Paper, Kim E. Barrett  . j$ h: z% a% s2 C  E
The Elements of Style, William Strunk, Jr. (www.bartleby.com/index.html) 3 h, V5 G2 k% C4 @8 K! E
: Y/ M  e3 g! A. y: ~1 S
I.          Select the journal and follow guidelines. Guidelines provide authors with what is expected in manuscripts. Review published papers for style and form.
- m6 ]! y8 @) z4 p3 ~2 k2 m1 [  i$ b, p# r3 W2 g
II.          Prepare outline of paper. What are major points to be made in each section? ) S1 F% W- L* M

, d* C6 D5 }2 vIII.          Title % A3 {; r) z" Q$ }$ K; I3 W* I
A. Be as specific as possible. The title is a key element that describes the content of the paper.  4 w) m9 K) f" N1 o1 ^
9 m) J8 t* B/ g  a% Z; u9 ?
        Role for Dopamine in Neuronal Damage Produced by Malonate ! W# S' d9 Q0 K4 f4 K5 z
       
  {( }. b1 J  c5 E" A! N# i% D        Role for Dopamine in Malonate-Induced Damage In Vivo in Striatum and In Vitro in Mesencephalic Cultures
2 z- ]7 p6 C) z3 F        8 C& C9 t5 @& h# O/ r
        Dopamine Contributes to Neuronal Damage Produced by Malonate in Mouse Striatum and in Mesencephalic Cultures
: L& p. H+ j, B* ~/ M
9 f9 l' e( w( g1 h( o# G0 oIV.    Abstract
+ k: ]: d+ t- w$ [/ mA. The abstract is the "window" to revealing contents of paper. + S9 |: s8 H+ l/ B8 W, d$ b
B. Medline and other search programs provide easy access to abstracts. The contents of the abstract will determine whether a reader will actually read the paper. Thus, it is important that the abstract contain all key findings within the space allowed. 0 r# }: g- h% H5 M$ w
C. Abstract should include the following:
& Y0 j, b* O7 L% ~# w7 w: w1. Background: 1-3 sentences + u$ `" k. ^* ]" B: U
2. Hypothesis/purpose of studies: I sentence " I' n5 s1 O: s7 l7 g# z# k
3. Model systems used (e.g., rat, mouse)
$ L" u# v7 N* S  G9 q% u4. Methods - general (e.g., acute vs. chronic treatment; do not provide specifics)
! I* i/ w" P. x" {0 \# H; X% B0 l5. Results: Provide as complete a summary of the findings as possible but avoid presenting actual data values (space limitations).
: D4 g2 |& _5 B& `6. Statement as to significance & D! L* P; @, o9 a, O
5 e: L* p( M! F6 H1 V/ Z* W# W
V.     Background * I) q* p8 |$ f& M5 y
A. Provide brief review of pertinent literature and cite relevant findings that led to studies. Be careful not to exclude relevant findings by other investigators. $ d. z) i' T7 _! H5 h- ~
B. Discuss unknowns that remain to be determined or controversies that exist in the literature. Controversial findings need to be addressed (Background or Discussion). Present controversial findings in the Introduction if they are key to rationale for studies. 1 V6 N1 A7 w% k; s4 x. x/ j5 W
C. Why was the study undertaken? State hypothesis or purpose of studies. + |/ [- r% g0 o. W% D! o
/ ]+ k% d# f$ W0 v4 h
VI.    Materials/Methods
, Q' g' a+ n! E* D9 QA. Provide sufficient details so that another investigator can repeat your experiments.
0 T" |$ H' J9 S- }( a) D/ K6 J' UB. Avoid detailed reiteration of published procedures but describe any modifications. ! `- p; s2 b8 F, o, c
C. Provide source of materials and make-up of non-standardized solutions (e.g., drugs).
4 x2 q8 X+ I3 t6 O8 N, WD. Provide information on statistical analysis. Are they appropriate? # y: Y; A6 n4 m; U
E. Presentation of data (here or in figure legends/tables). Is variation in SD or SEM? If SEM, need to provide number of observations in each group. 4 n/ k  G4 E, T! g; ^$ S# ?

& \7 m; M, p; {3 m" z4 ]) Z$ K" [VII.   Results
8 e/ O/ B* D: k/ h# J0 a( YA. Present findings in a logical progression through the experimental process. Tell a story; this does not necessarily mean that findings will be presented in the chronological order in which they were performed.
6 ^0 |! E9 n* z+ a4 K, i7 T' [/ ^B. Provide sufficient interpretation of data to lead the reader from one concept to the next but leave detailed analysis for the Discussion section.
9 n4 X& H) o: M! uC. Avoid duplication of information particularly of data within text, figures or tables, or in figure legends.
3 ^7 m0 Y% C0 S+ Z5 \2 P4 Z" pD. Save comparison of findings from studies to those of others for Discussion section.
6 \# c. P' O; G( p( w" _9 h, g1 e: d7 Q4 t" \
VIII.   Discussion * j" X* S+ \2 a4 U2 m! ?1 W2 t
A. Avoid simple reiteration of background information - place discussion in context of background. Discuss how your results advance knowledge in the area. ) V5 \% ?# t. d6 n* X1 o
B. Avoid reiteration of results. Discuss results as to interpretations and conclusions based on findings. Speculation is okay, but avoid excessive speculation. 2 {" u; C$ K/ ^4 B- {! w7 g: Q6 R
C. Generally, it may be helpful to structure the discussion section to parallel presentation of results. Initiate with introductory paragraph that restates the purpose of studies? Provide overview of findings with brief mention of significance? # X. `& c: b% N( v% k
D. Discuss significance of findings (last paragraph?).
5 x. O$ @7 o( p8 j8 A9 y9 n& m0 s. |4 \5 x7 E2 r
IX.      References
! Z% \* W- b- a4 j5 o$ U% dA. Limit number of citations. : w' x- k' k, N  v' ^
B. Use of reviews vs original papers.
$ r+ Z0 n6 ]$ M: Q* hC. Avoid excessive self-citations to the exclusion of others. * t0 y' X2 I+ X7 K. A2 J* S
D. Check references for accuracy. * N4 q" M3 O/ Q6 t( |# g+ E
/ }  C5 n7 N4 ?5 r% b9 j& O
X.       Order of Writing
1 {& T' i0 M% N5 E1 FA.    Abstract, background, results, discussion?
- a  z+ o6 _8 Z: f+ ]B.    Results, background, discussion, abstract?
) U- Q- R- w0 J) sC.    Results, discussion, background, abstract? ; m+ d2 K, l6 S
: K' a4 N; V4 ]+ `# R) T
XI.       Writing Style & j' V, C, \: R. F
A.  Organization of paragraphs. Use one paragraph per topic. Begin each paragraph with a general sentence. The structure should resemble an "hourglass" where the content goes from general to specifics to conclusion statement that conforms with first sentence. Does new paragraph link with previous? May need an introductory sentence that provides link.
, K4 M4 d8 r) Y! D0 v% W, K        Example: The impairment of energy metabolism by inhibitors of succinate dehydrogenase ... imposes a metabolic stress on multiple neuronal populations. The infusion of malonate, a reversible inhibitor of SDH, into the stfiatum of animals causes ... degeneration of DA and GABA neurons. Moreover, the exposure of rat embryonic mesencephalic cultures to malonate results in damage to both DA and GABA neurons. These observations indicate that a metabolic stress imposed by impairment of energy metabolism can cause degeneration of both DA and GABA neurons.
+ ~9 r9 S# m( W- R) G1 E
1 K6 n  v2 _2 ^* ^3 GB.  Write simply and directly; omit needless words. Avoid run-on sentences. Example: The identification of DA release is particularly relevant because of accumulating evidence which suggests that this neurotransmitter may act as an endogenous neurotoxin and contribute to the pathology of PD, HD and ischemia-induced damage in the striatum (ref).& B2 ?/ k: b7 R5 j  @6 }8 Z
        vs.
0 H/ t! c3 |3 R2 E' i        Endogenous DA may become toxic under various pathological conditions as seen in PD, HD or stroke (re)g. In ischemia models, striatal DA is released from the nerve terminals into the extracellular space. Furthermore, infusion of DA into the striatum, which mimics an increase in extracellular DA, causes neuronal damage. These observations suggest that increased extracellular DA may be detrimental in various pathological conditions. # y' z4 H: W" U
( o! E; T0 z; i. O- G1 y5 {
C.  Use active rather than passive voice.
8 I& R, _9 t% U# l0 @# O! U/ U# t        Example: Smith and colleagues have reported that drug X produced its effects ... vs. Drug X produces... (Smith et al.). ( _1 m* R" k; \# v+ c

2 y1 |3 c% o" c        Example: Our studies have demonstrated that... vs. We demonstrate that...
- u3 q7 `# s! a9 V2 S. }6 q" k; G' G4 \& \' c1 k2 e/ b/ \
D.   Avoid use of noun strings. 6 x* x- t- Q% @3 N, X9 ~" m2 j. I
        Example: The malonate dopamine toxicity ... vs. The toxicity of malonate to dopaminergic neurons... + r# v3 f, _( a* Y* Z

/ T' S8 F: \' h  H- XE.  Use verbs rather than noun forms of verbs.
5 @* I: x; i, f, Q8 |Examples: My suggestion is that the discussion of the issues ... vs. I suggest that we discuss the issues... . l5 D6 b6 l. y% M8 E4 y
Our conclusion is that the impairment of renal function by the drug is due to ... vs. We conclude that the drug impairs renal function by actions... 3 T: K# [; P( |+ D: m
This study was a further investigation of the phenomena that Drug X produces ... vs. We further investigated whether Drug X… / [. M3 E9 ^4 W: {, M5 W; A+ s

# O/ K! ]) q$ UF.    Avoid excessive use of abbreviations.; v+ M+ D* m! ]- x3 M! Z8 u

- j8 ?2 g6 W5 WComes from: http://www.the-aps.org/careers/c ... p/2001/Sonsalla.doc

linxingxing

. S( i- v# p% M7 j% a; {. w$ K$ w/ C9 }/ K' B1 a" p
Do's and Don'ts
- x$ e) f( s1 f6 e1 u8 A% a0 u0 p) \Do ensure that all requested items are submitted to the journal office; you do not want to make enemies of the editorial office staff or, worse, the Editor. * a1 t) j$ V- a6 c% x

" C& @# e' V3 vDo try to enlist the help of a native English-speaking colleague to assist with the preparation of your manuscripts if English is not your first language.
) l( v( E  s$ }2 T* E; C* j& v; q0 x$ J5 k! d; p6 K2 Z
Do read your manuscript carefully prior to submission, and preferably ask a number of individuals to check the typescript for errors. Familiarity breeds "typo-blindness"! * m$ B5 ^% Q  i( [  S& z; Y

/ ~+ G& K& N' |4 U* i4 {/ c: rDo conduct your experiments with a view to their ultimate publication. Thus, don't waste too much time with a series of studies with minor variations in design, only to have to go back to make the required number of repetitions of an experiment to allow for statistical analysis.
# J) M0 K( v: L9 i, Z( |. v$ U0 g9 d$ U* P' a& G, t( [) s
Do state the hypothesis of your study prominently in the introduction section.
7 {7 e6 [) w) ]; B( w& r3 Z% s
. f1 c2 ^: P. O5 n4 B  B* j5 \2 l& dDo read the instructions! - h$ l4 ]# k* F
7 Q1 _& T7 _) m5 j7 t! J, Q) {
Do consider starting to prepare your manuscript even before all of the experiments are complete. Often, outlining the results section will alert you to gaps in the reasoning and additional experiments that can fill them. # l5 K4 K" m9 V" `

% E0 E7 m) x* B( k* r+ c% YDo provide all authors, including students, an opportunity to comment on the manuscript before it is submitted. Indeed, many journals now require a signed statement to the effect that all authors have seen and approve of the manuscript's contents. / ^4 ], w7 W: d( a; x; Q

. V% w% \0 n' yDo try to make your study complete. Resist the temptation to submit your work as LPU-s (least publishable units). ) o: k5 l; \; ?
& {2 P4 }! n% O+ m2 Y" W2 y9 ~
Do try to allow your students and fellows to develop their own writing style, while maintaining quality control over the output of your laboratory.
: d2 w8 |6 `' b1 o/ x" t, \( ^: M. |- ]) _) L7 r1 p
Do participate in the peer-review process of journal manuscripts to the greatest extent possible. It is a wonderful way to learn what works (and what doesn't).   [" H) X- M& m# X4 W
6 T3 D4 V2 u# e- s$ Y) B) C
Do be willing to accept constructive criticism from trusted colleagues. 6 K- ]6 G, v5 `' n4 W8 w; H
: T8 k% b) m. r1 [0 N  p, G8 w. k
Don’t include data that has been published previously, other than in abstract form. Prior publication includes symposium proceedings and the like that are not peer-reviewed, even if the data are only in preliminary form in the prior work.
5 U1 H3 b9 |$ a% P8 F, L6 r7 p  i( Z3 ~' y
Don’t rely too heavily on the spell-check feature of your word processor (but do use it!). Don't include titles on figures intended for publication. 0 J* P5 U5 k  k; v

7 J1 I  v: l& {; \Don’t feel that you cannot call or write to the Editor for clarification, if points raised in the review process seem unclear. Note, however, that some editors will only accept such inquiries if made in writing.
% p7 v! \" e0 p. w# ?: g) G
) O# T2 a0 X5 V5 sDon’t give co-authors unlimited amounts of time to comment on the manuscript. Set them a deadline after which you will proceed with submission with or without their input.
, L& N& t- D- ?. s" H) ~3 S
9 G0 Z2 V6 A# q  f8 a  EComes from: http://www.the-aps.org/careers/c ... op/2001/Barrett.doc

fanfuzi09

写综述总是被骂，值得看看再提高

linxingxing

It is a good way to know more about the stuff what you are doing now

pig

tieyun

It's very useful, thank you very much!

张也行

Very Helpful！ Thannks a lot!

linxingxing

The most critical thing is to practice a lot.
0 `- f! b+ e1 |; u; H) _: XI am writing a review now, the sentences sound like a kid's words.
8 _, m% c( M+ H8 nread first, then do it personally.

linxingxing

9# linxingxing : @& o/ r" Z5 O
7 Z5 @6 N; j# o& l
怎样在国际期刊上投稿from: http://bbs.bbioo.com/thread-44519-1-1.html
2 X: [4 e4 d5 e2 G# G- \7 ?* p5 T3 t- K' n* w( M
* |5 L1 J& U% z  T2 W1 ?, i$ o
首先，不管技巧怎样，遵照你所要发表文章所在期刊的投稿须知是最重要的。然后我们才能看有哪些软技巧，或者潜规则能够有助于我们在国际期刊上发文。
, L6 n- I. Z# o! A! I. }- j( M  F  N6 \) o# s
一、 Peer Review Process 同行评估' k- q% w9 M( y

. [2 I% A2 x0 T- f% G5 S5 Z& {& F所谓同行主要有三类不同的人。
2 U# o/ ?5 U# s; T第一类称为Editor(s)–Chief Editor ,Receiving Editor, etc! l; @4 K, s% x' I* D
这一类人称为主要编辑，即是首先看到你论文的人，他们的主要工作就是：保证发表论文的质量和该期刊的发展方向，即决定什么领域的论文收和什么领域的论文不收；决定针对你的稿子收还是不收，即是你的稿子直接打回还是送专家评审。
% a6 _# V+ y8 D0 h. O. j7 z% h
, r  ~) o' G5 p4 Y第二类称为Members of Editorial Board* R7 t  [# `  H0 r9 N- V, k7 q
这些人是在你论文研究内容领域内比较有名的人，根据刊的不同这些人又分为两类，
4 P, L( n, }" v! ?一种是，几个人加起来可以作为Major Editor的作用；另一种是，没有权力决定收或者不收，近似于评审员的作用。这些人往往了解该刊的情况，能把握收入文章的尺度。4 o" n) L, Q" ^

6 E8 ]. M/ ^8 L  y! P1 K: P  V第三类称为Referees
- ]8 u4 G' W# m这一类人不限于某一刊，任何刊物都可能让其为论文进行评估，但必须是他们所从事研究领域内的，他们往往是你论文研究领域内的专家。一般这类人只是给主要编辑一个参考作用，任何Referees都没有权力决定该刊物收还是不收你的论文。4 c3 R% m# s4 l  X
（这里有一个错觉，因为作者往往只在回执中看到Referees的意见，以为收不收文章是由Referees决定的，其实不然，这我们会在后面详细解释）
! S+ }. a9 X4 `% q# Y( x  k2 t
4 d. H9 D' C. S& c' l1 K" I二、 What Happens When A Manuscript Is Submitted to A Journal
% W( W" Y9 b* Y3 _! ]% e; ?& j. A4 K
投了后是怎样处理你的文章的呢？分为两类杂志说明5 X4 k! a& O4 l
1. 一般的学术期刊，普遍是投到主编办公室，主编先看。这里的主编主要是看摘要，明白你的文章属于哪个领域主要讲什么，然后找审稿人（同行），然后审稿人再深入分析，再连同评审报告一起寄回。报告是两份，一份是给论文作者看的，一份是给编辑看的。当然给作者看的报告要客气很多，而给编辑看的报告就要直率许多，往往直刺你的软肋。一般地编辑不可能只看一位referee的报告，至少有两个评审员report。最后一套流程下来，仍是由编辑决定收还是不收。在这里需要指出，绝大多数编辑本身是科研人员，他们很忙，所以一般大致看一下论文，再看referees的意见后决定。* e$ u2 Q, J* h$ g. }9 b
2、 还有一类如Nature, Science, Cell, NEJM , The Lancat等少数顶级牛杂志，它们的编辑
: T/ }) P% |7 x5 U6 j则都是全职人员，不再科研，以前实际研究非常广泛。这类杂志的宗旨比较特别：文章不仅要在本专业中是最专业的，而且必须对其他领域有影响。' R5 W$ q) N9 f
论文处理过程：首先，全职编辑读论文，进行意义评价，而不单是技术评价，要求论文不光在本领域内有影响；其次，如果认为该文章有跨领域意义，就转给评审人（referees），评审人再从技术角度考察，验证过程、结果是否可靠。这样我们就可以理解为什么有的人投了牛杂志，而被直接退稿，连review都没有，不是认为你的论文差到根本不屑一看，而是编辑认为它没有广泛意义，所以没有送评。一般阵亡在编辑手中的论文，据说就有50%!!
( V1 r2 `6 Q+ X( y) ]- m% L- K* w
, ?) y9 {! i7 M. v, x三、 Points needed to pay attention to! O  ]1 y/ v% E5 S3 T

9 p4 R! g+ K/ U+ [( b. q1、 投稿前
# y8 C9 f) I% I5 kManuscript-Clear Presentation: g3 I# e& o# Q& s9 t" p( J
一般阐述原则——清晰表达 普遍有这样一种错觉，认为专业文章应该是高深的，语言越复杂越好。但事实上科学论文要尽量用清晰的句子。
4 W. z( ?$ {) Q7 e6 ]8 Z5 a4 \0 z按照传统方式地寄论文的话，除了你的论文外，开头是需要附上一封给Dear Editor的信的，信中主要介绍你论文的名字、主题、内容，说明投到某某杂志送来评审，请您考虑发表。当然一些杂志可能还有别的要求，譬如要说明论文署名中的每个作者都做了什么（如果是共同署名的话），确认每个作者都看了最后一稿，并同意发表到此杂志。9 [1 W( I$ x; o( |; s6 S" \3 C6 W8 h
具体说到Cover Letter怎样写好，主要有下面几个注意点：
" }5 @8 d( i1 d* ta）要简单地概括论文的意义（2-3句话），以防你的文章在编辑手中被误解和低估，对编辑给予正性的影响。需要注意的是，最好不重复论文摘要的内容/ m( j9 x" X8 {
b）可以在信中建议谁来做评审（允许建议3-5个），因为往往作者会比编辑更清楚该领域内谁是世界上最合适的。但你所建议的评审原则上不适合提名共同合作项目的人或共同使用研究经费的人（至少5年内曾经有过合作经历的人是不可以的）。当然你也可以建议编辑不要把你的文章送给某些人评审。3 X7 m9 u4 ~' T; a
具体地说一般原则是：你在建议referees时，一不要有你熟悉的人；二不要是你接触过，但你认为是思路狭窄的人。你在建议除去的referees，即不希望由这些人来评审你的文章时，一要把你认为思路狭窄的那些人列入，二要把你的主要竞争对手列入，所谓的竞争对手就是那些与你从事同一领域研究的人，这是一个防止恶性竞争的机制。一般地，在你建议用的3-5个referees中，刊物会选取一个。而你建议除去的2-3个，刊物基本是会满足你的要求的。而且，一般除去的是不光个人，而是你竞争对手所在的整个实验室（科研组）。
7 F6 w  A% h5 Y, U特别地，对于象Nature这样的顶级杂志，给它的Cover letter就要加一句Genaral Interests，例如，你的文章是讲有机合成的，那你就要加一句，我这个有机合成的研究成果不光在本领域内有作用，还对医学有意义。这样就给编辑一正性引导，如果他看过你的摘要，觉得没问题，就会送去评审，你的第一关就顺利通过了。
8 E! G& |. e  U( V1 {1 R4 r/ b7 ^- z6 s2 I" L
２、During Peer Review Process Responding to Referees and Editor2 H4 U7 v: E0 @7 u$ x+ |* Y8 ?# D# R
一般编辑有三种决定
; ]- w( y$ s+ Q4 c+ F5 m. l) x  ]１） 直接接受。这是那种好到不用改就直接发表的文章，极其罕见。
# e$ U! m4 Z% c( K8 s$ V+ E/ B1 A２）直接拒绝。现在这稿不能接受，要改。这种情况比较普遍，也是需要详细说明的必须着重指出，要求修改不代表不接受，也不代表接受。具体发不发你的文章要看你改的情况，连改几次才发表或者改了很多次最终还是被退稿都是有可能的。所以当你回复修改要求时，有四点要注意：第一，一定要非常非常礼貌，也许 Referees在报告里面让你改的内容其实你已经写了，只是他没有看到而已，那么你就会很气愤他的不负责，但这里的礼貌并不代表同意他的无理要求。况且，你的回复是给编辑看的，所以对评审的气愤绝对不能转嫁到编辑身上，第二，也许，Referees在报告中会补很多要求，譬如要你增加某些实验或补充证明某一原理。凭经验，最好的对策就是：他说什么你做什么，能做什么就做什么。但遇到实在不可能的情况下，也需要采取不同的策略，一种是理论上不可能达到他要的实验结果，那么你就要回信去争辩。当然，要用科学去争辩或采用演绎推理的手段。另一种是It takes years，就是他要求你完善的部分需要好多年才能完成，你又不可能有那个时间。最好的一种答复就是，你强调现在个工作已足够得出此结论，你有足够的把握来支持。第三，Argue with　Scientific evidence not personal attack。如果有争论，一定要是有科学的争论，但不能攻击个人，譬如说Referees没有仔细看等等，显然是在攻击评审工作不负责任。（当时举过一个例子，Nature杂志曾经接到一个印度人的回复，回信一开篇，该印度人就大骂美国是为了扼杀印度而不让其文章发表）第四，Avoid being defensive argue，你在争论的时候要比较客观，不能有自我偏向。为了避免这种现象，你可以把你写的给临近领域的人看，例如没有参加该项目研究的同事。. @7 }1 @0 M8 }$ L' r
" O2 K4 P' ^$ K0 I
3、After Decision4 `6 w+ R8 q9 L6 Y: h4 m, b

+ q: P% _8 z/ D, {- [7 q显然，结论只有Accept和Reject两种，接受了就是编辑同意发表了，也没什么需要提示注意的了。而遇到拒绝时，则要求我们首先calm down and think, 特别是那种修改过很多次，但仍然被拒绝的更要冷静。虽然发封信去大骂一通很解气，但后果是你下半辈子永远也别想在该杂志上发表文章了。当然，即使被拒绝了，如果你想发，还是有其他办法的，尤其是改过很多次的，改的次数越多，说明你的文章越有价值。
9 L" G* C, t  `. `! ~. W; |（1） 投到其他杂志去——Submit to a rival journal，
2 b. a6 Z- s( D& F; t任何学术领域总是有至少两个竞争对手的，改过的文章，往往被对手刊物接收的几率也会大些。但有一点要注意，越到高级别的杂志发文的竞争也越高，你把文章投另一家后，可能又要经历一个review的过程，极有可能又花一年时间去修改，对一些强调时效性的文章来说，弄不好等你好不容易发出来的时候，你的竞争同行早发表了类似成果。那么你的文章也失去了意义。所以，有时候我们可以选择拿到低一些级别的杂志去发，这样比较容易。
; D8 b! z. q; R" k6 E) d- @5 E5 ]- f3 R
（2）Appeal/Rebute找编辑评理$ C9 s1 k" N) `8 S: ?
有时候虽然被拒绝了，但你认为不公的话，是可以去找编辑评理，要求仲裁。但首先要注意你的Appeal是写给编辑的to the editor(It is editor’s decision)。编辑是第三者，你可以直接说给你评审的referees这不好，那不好。其次，不要重复你在之前修改文章时的responses中回答的问题，编辑会对你形成不好的印象，他的reject的结论本来就是根据你原来的responses而作出的，因此，这个是无法说服他改变决定的。第三，再次强调still not being defensive and no personal attack。如果你一稿就被拒绝了，那么appeal一点用都没有，而被要求修改的次数越多则 ,$ Y, [  H6 c: S5 T! v+ k0 |
appeal成功率越高，越高级杂志，appeal机会越多，成功率也越高