General Answer to Reviewers ’

ارزیابی میزان دقت داوران یکی از مجلات علمی پژوهشی فارسی زبان در تشخیص اصلاحات مورد نیاز یک مقاله علمی ارسالی؛ سال 1389

  Background and Objectives: Final corrections on a manuscript sent for publication in a scientific journal are suggested by reviewers. So this qualifies the paper with the least errors for publication. The present study aimed to assess the Persian language peer reviewers' comments on a manuscript sent to an Iranian Scientific Journal (journal of Rafsanjan university of medical sciences), 2010....

Peer Reviewers’ Comments on Research Articles Submitted by Iranian Researchers

The invisible hands of peer reviewers play a determining role in the eventual fate of submissions to international English-medium journals. This study builds on the assumption that non-native researchers and prospective academic authors may find the whole strive for publication, and more specifically, the tough review process, less threatening if they are aware of journal reviewers’ expectation...

Answer to the reviewers : Reviewer 1 report - Thomas Mueller

Thanks to Our Peer-Reviewers in 2016

Author's Response to Reviews Thank You for Submitting Your Research Article Manuscript to Bmc Cancer for Consideration of Publication. Your Manuscript Has Been Reviewed By

Title:Nrf2 is a potential prognostic marker and promotes proliferation and invasion in human hepatocellular carcinoma Author's response to reviews: see over Dear editor, We are pleased to answer the questions of the reviewers' and the manuscript (MS: 5123661121557048) has also been extensively revised according to the comments and the journal style. This paper was proofread by a native English ...