英文论文审稿意见汇总以下12点无轻重主次之分。
每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成。
1、目标和结果不清晰。
It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader.2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。
◆In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical methods used in the study.◆Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these variousexperimentsshould be provided.3、对于研究设计的rationale:Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design.4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨：The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not showif the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation.5、对hypothesis的清晰界定：A hypothesis needs to be presented。
6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念：What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio?7、对研究问题的定义：Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear,write one section to define the problem8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review:The topic is novel but the application proposed is not so novel.9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification:There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with previously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on previous work.：题问度谨严、10．MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to prove that.11、格式（重视程度）：◆In addition, the list of references is not in our style. It is close but not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with Instructions for Authorswhich shows examples.◆Before submitting a revision be sure that your material is properly preparedand formatted. If you are unsure, please consult the formatting nstructions to authors that are given under the Instructions and Forms button in he upper right-hand corner of the screen.12、语言问题（出现最多的问题）：有关语言的审稿人意见：◆It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader.◆The authors must have their work reviewed by a proper translation/reviewing service before submission; only then can a proper review be performed. Most sentences contain grammatical and/or spelling mistakes or are not complete sentences.◆As presented, the writing is not acceptable for the journal. There are pro blems with sentence structure, verb tense, and clause construction.◆The English of your manuscript must be improved before resubmission. We strongly suggest that you obtain assistance from a colleague who is well-versed i n English or whose native language is English.◆Please have someone competent in the English language and the subject matter of your paper go over the paper and correct it. ?◆the quality of English needs improving.来自编辑的鼓励：Encouragement from reviewers:◆I would be very glad to re-review the paper in greater depth once it has be en edited because the subject is interesting.◆There is continued interest in your manuscript titled ……which you subm itted to the Journal of Biomedical Materials Research: Part B - Applied Biomat erials.◆The Submission has been greatly improved and is worthy of publication.本文来自CSDN博客，转载请标明出处：/chenyusiyuan/archive/2008/12/03/3437577.aspx老外写的英文综述文章的审稿意见Ms. Ref. No.: ******Title: ******Materials Science and EngineeringDear Dr. ******,Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If youare prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsidermy decision.For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below.Reviewer #1: This work proposes an extensive review on micromulsion-basedmethods for the synthesis of Ag nanoparticles. As such, the matter is of interest,however the paper suffers for two serious limits:1) the overall quality of the English language is rather poor;2) some Figures must be selected from previous literature to discuss also thesynthesis of anisotropically shaped Ag nanoparticles (there are severalexamples published), which has been largely overlooked throughout thepaper. ;Once the above concerns are fully addressed, the manuscript could be acceptedfor publication in this journal来源:/blog/rensl.htm这是一篇全过程我均比较了解的投稿，稿件的内容我认为是相当不错的，中文版投稿于业内有较高影响的某核心期刊，并很快得到发表。
其时我作为审稿人之一，除了提出一些修改建议外，还特建议了5篇应增加的参考文献，该文正式发表时共计有参考文献25篇。