以下内容首发于微信公众号：【埃米编辑SCI论文润色】。关注微信公众号，写作投稿更容易~如有论文润色需求，可以联系我们哦~
论文从投稿到接收，说难不难，说简单也不完全简单。今天，我们用一篇真实顶刊论文的三轮审稿，以及作者两次返修的详细经过，带你了解论文是如何经过大修小修最终顺利发表的！
首先说说审稿意见。
审稿意见一般分为总体评价和逐条意见。
◆ 总体评价主要是整体评价文章，包括优缺点，给出总体意见，如“接受（Accept）”、“大修（Major）”、“小修（Minor）”或“拒稿（Reject）”。
◆ 逐条意见就是论文的各种问题了。大修意见可能涉及论文的实验设计、数据分析、结构布局等核心内容。小修可能包括语言表达、拼写错误、写作规范等问题。
1 案例解析
本篇案例是发表在Chemical Science的一篇论文，经历了三轮同行评审，多个大修小修，历时5个月，最终成功发表。
Chemical Science是化学综合类TOP期刊，中科院一区，最新影响因子7.6分。
这些审稿意见和作者回复，真实且完整，对普通作者，尤其是新手作者来说，相当于一次“演习”，值得借鉴学习哦~
1） 第一轮
共4位审稿人，综合意见为“大修”：
审稿人1：大修，语言需全面修改，引用不准确，实验设计存在问题。
审稿人2：大修，未提及相关研究，建议进行比较；改进引言、结论等。
审稿人3：小修，某些实验数据质量不高，需重新采集并补充实验细节。
审稿人4：大修，简化文章结构，完善实验设计。
第一轮就3个大修1个小修，涉及实验设计、数据、文章结构等文章基本面，是个不小的挑战，来看看作者都做了哪些功课。
审稿意见原文（部分摘录）：
审稿人1：
【首先总结论文主要工作，指出论文优点】……present a very interesting and fascinating study …… Many new reaction patterns emerged, and the resulting complexes were thoroughly characterized by various experimental techniques and DFT computations.
【接着指出了论文缺点】Nevertheless, the language of the manuscript makes it sometimes hard to digest and a thorough proof-reading is required as one example might serve: ……The sentence is grammatically incorrect and not readily understandable.
【然后给出了整体大修的意见】Overall while I am expressed by the quality and the amount work carried by the authors, I believe major revisions are required before the manuscript is actually suitable for Chemical Science as a premier journal in the area. Nevertheless, the manuscript certainly appeals to a broader audience than just those chemists working in the area of f-element chemistry.
【具体意见】I request that the authors consider the following points:
1. No reference to “Scheme 1, b” and “Scheme 2, b” in the manuscript. It would be nice to reference these aspects explicitly in the manuscript. 【引用的问题】
……
2. With respect to ligand design what is the function of the ……? It never coordinates, what a simple alkylation of …… serve a similar purpose. 【实验设计的问题】
……
审稿人2：
【直接提出重要问题：另一篇类似研究未被提及或引用，应该进行比较】Crucial: I have recently reviewed another similar manuscript of this group with the title “***" (submitted to **杂志**期). This former study also deals with reactivity of ……This work is not cited and mentioned in the present manuscript. In my opinion, comparison should be drawn.
……
接着对introduction和conclusion的写作提出意见，同时提到要注意语言表达和语法问题。introduction: comparison to transition metal chemistry should be more elaborate.
……
- conclusion is not comprehensible as it stands. It should be written in way that the reader will understand without going back and forth to the results and discussion section - lots of awkward wording and grammar.
……
审稿人3：
整体给了小修，对论文创新性和实验结果表示认可，仅需要少量修改，小修意见比较好处理，这里整体略过哦。
审稿人4：
再来一个大修。首先认可作者做出的工作The authors are to be commended for a great deal of difficult work……This paper will interest a wide audience of chemists looking for better/new ways to effect these transformations.
然后提出了对实验设计的重要问题和修改意见。编辑的decision letter中提示要重点关注审稿人4，就是这个基本盘的问题了。
However, here no solution state reactivity characterisation or experimental mechanistic study are reported at all.
The DFT is plausible and comes from respected authors, but there is no way to judge is it is mechanistically correct, and/or general (only 2 reactions are studied).
……
另外写作要更加简洁，深入。
If this paper were able to be re-written to be more concise, while including experimental/solution state exploration (even of a smaller number of reaction partners, and with a smaller number of metals) that enabled the authors to draw some conclusions of what happens when and how (that would do – the why is very hard), then it would represent a breakthrough, and science that could be utilised by the wider community, and be an obvious candidate for publication in this flagship journal.
作者整体上态度积极，正面回应问题、修改文章，并认真逐条回复了审稿意见。
作者回复信：
【首先感谢编辑和审稿人】Thank you very much for your comments and efforts in managing the manuscript submitted to Chemical Science (assigned No: ***).
【根据审稿人意见修改了论文，提供回复列表】We have revised the paper according to your suggestion and reviewers’ comments. A list of responses to referees’ comments can be read in the responses to referees.
【作者还提供了修订后的电子补充信息，修订后的CheckCIF，标出高亮的PDF版本，以及PDF的干净版本的论文】On behalf of all coauthors and myself, and according to your suggestion, we now submit the revised paper to the Chemical Science for publication. All coauthors have confirmed the submission of the revision. Along with this submission, the revised electronic supplementary information, revised CheckCIF, a highlighted PDF version, and a PDF version of the paper are provided.
【在语言方面，作者重新组织了文本，提高语言逻辑性，以便读者理解研究结果的要点。并举例说明了具体修改内容】In this revision, we reorganized the text to make it more logically to help readers to understand the main points of the findings.The main revision includes……
【增加了参考文献、数据可用性说明、修改了CheckCIF】The data availability section was added in this revision. Some of references were added in this revision. The content of the data availability is added. The CheckCIF was revised to provide the number of complexes in accordance with main text.
【再次表示感谢】We hope this revision will guarantee the quality of the paper to meet the requirements of Chemical Science. We would highly appreciate if you have the paper examined and recommended to the journal for publication.
2） 返修后收到第二轮意见
这次一共2位审稿人，对修改后的文章给了小修：
审稿人1：建议“接受”
审稿人2：总体认可“接受”， 建议改进结论部分，简化一些冗长的句子。
由此可见，第一轮的认真修改和回复是多么重要，会直接影响后面的结果。
审稿意见原文（部分摘录）：
审稿人1：【首先表示了对作者积极回复的认可，建议“接受”】The authors responded well to the reviewers' comments and significantly improved the manuscript. Hence acceptance is recommended. 【提出需要对论文措辞做出细微调整】Minor improvements in the wording of the manuscript should then by done during the type-setting of the manuscript generating the galley proofs by RSC.
审稿人2：
【同样认可作者做出的努力，建议“接受”】Most of the issues raised by the reviewers regarding the previous submission have been addressed satisfactorily while the manuscript improved considerably. Therefore, I do have no further objections to publication of this work in Chem. Sci., but the authors might give further consideration to the following minor issues.
【提出一些小问题，包括结论的写法、语言和语法问题、句子逻辑问题等】
- conclusion is still not comprehensible as it stands……still the reader has to go back and forth to the results and discussion section.
- the manuscript still contains awkward wording and grammar……many sentences are too long and hard to understand. Same is true for several of the Schemes, which are too densely arranged, overloaded hard to comprehend.
作者对于小修的细节问题也没有轻视，逐条认真做出回复：
作者回复：
……
【作者提供了审稿人意见回复列表】A list of responses to reviewers’ comments and suggestions
【针对共识的问题，作者重排方案、重绘图表；请专家对论文进行润色提升；修改了参考文献】General remarks on the revision:
In this revision, we reorganized the text to make it more logically to help readers to understand the main points of the findings. The main revisions include: Schemes and Figures in the article were redrawn and rearranged…… The text of the article was carefully revised including modification of sentences and improvement of grammar, and we have also asked an expert for help to improve English. Moreover, the references have also been carefully checked and revised accordingly.
【针对审稿人提出的具体意见，作者对照着意见原文，逐条回复，给出具体的修改方案】
Reviewer 1
Comments: The authors……
Response: Thanks for the comments and recommendation. We have carefully checked and modified the words and sentences in the article, and rearranged the Scheme diagrams, hoping to make the manuscript easier to follow.
3） 第三轮：
审稿人达成一致共识：恭喜“接受”！
审稿人：
认可作者在论文改进上的努力，建议“接受”！
The authors´efforts to improve the clarity of the manuscript are much appreciated.
No further objections to publication of this fine work in Chem. Sci.
恭喜作者成功上岸！
2 关键总结：审稿背后的成功秘籍
1） 审稿意见是提升论文的“法宝”
审稿人从不同角度审视你的论文，他们的反馈不仅是指出问题，更是帮助你提高论文质量的“关键”。
2） 别怕“大修”，放平心态
不要因为“大修”感到焦虑，把它视作完善论文的机会。通过认真修改，使论文更完整、更严谨，向顶刊更进一步！
3） “小修”意见也不能忽视
细节决定成败，从语言、结构到图表规范，这些细节都可能影响论文的最终评价。
4） 积极回应，赢得审稿人好感
审稿过程是与审稿人进行对话的过程，积极回应每一条意见，让审稿人感受到你的认真与投入，能增加论文被接收的机会。
5） 审稿是一场“耐心马拉松”
顶刊论文往往会经历多轮修改，这不仅考验你的科研“硬实力”，还考验你的耐心和坚持。所以要放平心态，沉着应对。
从“问题大修”到“最终接收”，这篇顶刊论文的返修经历告诉我们：返修是严格但充满机遇的过程，不要有畏惧情绪，直面问题，每一轮意见和修改都会让论文更加完善。相信持续的努力一定会带来成功发表，加油！
扫描下方二维码，关注【埃米编辑SCI论文润色】微信公众号，获取更多SCI论文写作资料，回复“礼包”，免费领取100+写作投稿资料包和投稿问题30问。
参考资料：
[1] https://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2024/SC/D4SC04197F
