内文评估及统计已完成-zm final irr with chinese

ConstructiveCaseNumber:ZM111711Customer:Dr.Manuscripttitle:脾切除加断流术门脉高压症兔肠微生态状况及微生态制剂的预研GeneralGeneralSummaryofThisThisstudyinvestigatedtheeffectsofmicrobialagentsonportalhypertensionmodelrabbitaftersplenectomywithdevascularization.Theauthorsused35rabbitsandsplitthemintogroups.And18post-operationsurvivorswerestudied.Accordingtotheauthors,microbialagentswerebeneficialtothepost-operationrabbits.First,thenumberofsurvivorrabbitsislimited,especiallyafterregrou.Thesignificanceofstatisticalysisbasedonthisnumberisnotveryconvincing.Second,thewaytheauthorsdidstatisticalysisrequiresimprovement.Isuggestthattheyshouldfindprofessionalassistance.这项研究探讨了微生态制剂对脾切除加贲门周围血管离断门脉高压兔模3518NoveltyandClinicalThenoveltyofthisstudyisgood,sincetherearenotalotsimilarreportsbeingpublishedrecently.Portalhypertensioniscommonlyseeninpatientswithliverdiseases.Thereforethedatainthismanuscriptmaybeusefulforthisgroupofpatients.Butthisstudyisbasedonrabbitmodel.Humanexperimentsarestillneededtovalidatetheresultshere.GrammarandEnglishTheentiremanuscriptisinChinese.AtleasttheauthorsneedtotranslatetheintoEnglish.整篇文章都是中文。作者至少需要将翻译成英文Thiswillbeamajorjob.Alotofproblemswereobservedinthismanuscript.Manyoftheseproblemsmaydirectlyleadtorejection.MissingSeeotherOthersignificantcommentsareSpecificSpecificTitleThetitle脾切除加断流术门脉高压症兔肠微生态状况及微生态制剂的干预研究”generallyadequayconveysthecontentofthepaper.Thismanuscriptisabouttheeffectsofmicrobialagents,notthestatusofmicrobialsinrabbitmodel.Thereforethefirstpartofthistitleshouldberemoved.标题“脾切除加断流术门脉高压症兔肠微生态状况及微生态制剂的干预研究”大模型的肠微生态状况。因此这个标题的前一部分可以删除。“微生态制剂”Thisshouldbemorespecific,sinceitseemsthereisonlyoneagentinvolvedinthisstudy.“微生态制剂”Themanuscriptdidnotcomewithatitlepage,whichmustincludethetitle,runningtitle,andthedetailedauthorinformation.息未给国外编辑&ThissectionneedssignificantItshouldbetranslatedintoEnglish.EvenChinesejournalsrequirean.应将其翻译成英语。即使中文期也要求要有一个英要 istoolong.Mostjournalsrequire oflessthan250这个过长。大多数期要求要少于250个字“①微生态制剂组（MOG：10只、②葡萄糖对照组(GOG：8只)分别灌服乳果糖+双歧杆菌活菌、葡萄糖”Hereitisconfusing.Descriptionofeachgroupshouldberightafterthenameofthegroup.“①微生态制剂组（MOG：10只、②葡萄糖对照组(GOG：8只)分别灌服乳果糖+双歧杆菌活菌、葡萄糖”这里有点。对每组的说明应该放在该组名“5只仅作为模型对照Idon’tseeanydataonthisgroupArethese5rabbitsintheoriginal35,ornot?“5只仅作为模型对照”355只么，还是不包括 :Thereare5 whicharerelatedtothetopicofthepresentstudy.“微生态制剂”aspecificnameshouldbeprovided.：这里有5个，均与本研究的相关。“微生态制剂”应提TheIntroductionispoorlywrittenandneedssignificantrevision.Itisveryshortandbrief.Thekeyconceptsandtechniquesinvolvedinthisstudyshouldallbeintroducedhere.Theauthorsfailedtodoso.这项涉及的主要概念及技术都应该在这里加以介绍作者没有这样做Statementsmadeinthissectionshouldbesupportedbyproper在这一节的叙述应适当的文献加以支持Theauthorsshouldtryhardertostressoutwhythisstudyisimportantandclinicallysignificant.ThisisoneofthemostimportantelementsforagoodIntroduction.作者应尽量强调这项研究之所以很重要的原因及其临床意义。这是一个较好的引言的最重要的元一。MaterialsandThissectionneedssignificantrevisionbefore“ShamOperationGroupWhathavebeendoneinthisgroup?Therearetoomanydeathcasesinthisstudy.Idon’tthinkthisisnormalforthisoperation.Thisshouldbeexplained.在这项研究中的案例太多了。我认为这不是这种手术的正常情况。对此“以二次法血吸虫尾蚴建立门脉高压症动物模型行血流动力学检查验证模型。”Moredetailsonthismodelandwhatprotocoltheauthorsfollowedshouldbeprovided,aswellastheprotocolonhowthemodelwastested.Ifthishasbeendonepreviouslyinthislabandpublishedalreadyareferenceshouldbelisted.“以二次法血吸虫尾蚴建立门脉高压症动物模型行血流动力学检查验证模型”关于这一模型的的细节信息及作者所遵循的方案以及如何测试模型的方案应予以提供。如果这在本先前已经完成且已经，应“5只兔仅作为模型对照。Wheredidthis5rabbitscomefrom?Theymustcomefromthesamesourceasthestudygroupsothattheycouldbeusedascontrol“5只兔仅作为模型对照。”5只兔出自哪里？它们必须与研究组的来Allreagents/medications/equipmentsshouldbeintroducedwithspecificdetails,whichincludethemodel,resource,dosage,andetc.Forexample,“送超微病理电镜下观察肠黏膜病变”,heretheinformationupontheEMshouldbeprovided.例如“送超微病理电镜下观察肠黏膜病变”,EM“总胆红素（TBLL）Itshouldbe“TBIL”.AbbreviationssuchasTEandITSshouldbeTEITSIn1.3.5,图像分析系统”needsmore在1.3.5节“图像分析系统”需要有的说明The ysisisTheResultssectionistoosimpleandmoredescriptionshouldbe结果部分过于简单，应提供的说明Theauthorsshouldbrieflyexplainwhytheywanttodoeachexperimentatthebeginningofeachparagraph,andwhatthesignificanceofeachgroupofdataattheend.Thiswillmaketheentiremanuscriptmorelikealogicstory.Theauthorsshouldgivemoredescriptionsintextonfiguresanddata,insteadofjustonesentenceineachparagraph.关于图和数据作者应给出的文字说明而不是每段中只有一句话描述Figuresshouldbenumberedas“Figure1”andetc,not“FigureA,B,C,Dshouldbemergedintoone,asarefigureE,F,G,A、B、C、DE、F、G、HThefigurelegendsarethere,butfailtomeettherequirementsofSCIfigurelegends.Thelegendsshouldbedescriptivewithoutanyfurtherysis.Nocomparisonshouldbeinthelegends.SCIIntable1,thereis“抽样模型组”.Nopreviousdefinitionofthistermhasbeenprovided.Itneedsexplanation.1中，有“抽样模型组”。前文并没有提供这一词语的定义。需要解释一FiguresshouldputinappropriateformatsforSCI图应根据SCI期的要求，用合适的格式呈现“vsGOG、SOG、NOGisatthebottomoftable2.Thisisnotanappropriatewaytopresentstatisticaldata.Comparisonshouldbedonebetween2groupsateverytime,notwith3.“括号内为阳性率”Itseemsitshouldbepercentage,butinthetable,no“%”isused.2底部的“vsGOG、SOG、NOG”。这里呈现统计数据的方式不太合适。23组。“括号内为阳性率”这似乎应该是百分比，Throughoutthemanuscript,微生态制剂wasused.Butactuallythereisonlyoneagent“Bifidobacteriumused.Sothenameofthisagentshouldbeusedinsteadof贯穿全文使用了微生态制剂。但实际上，这里只有一种试剂“2.8肠道菌群DNA图谱分析”.Theysisdescribedhereisnotveryconvincing.HowmanytimeshavethisDNAgelbeenrepeated?Aretheyallthesame?Inaddition,therearestrongvariationsobservedbetweenL3-10,thestudygroup.Howtoexplainthis,andhowcanyoudrawsuchconclusionfromthisinconsistentdata?Thefirst2paragraphsshouldbeinIntroduction,notThefindingsthatareeitherdifferentfromorconsistentwiththeotherstudiesshouldbediscussed.Theauthorsfailedtodothis.ThisisamajormistakeforwritingagoodDiscussion.Thereisnoparagraphindicatingthelimitationsofthestudy.Theauthorsshouldprovidealistofwhattheybelievethelimitationsare.没有段落这项研究的局限性。作者应列出他们所认为的局限性有哪些ThereshouldbeoneparagraphattheendoftheDiscussiontoconcludewhattheauthorsfoundintheirstudyTheoneprovidedbytheauthorsisnotconciseenough.无Thereare