摘要
本文对《中华耳科学杂志》2010年～2011年168篇稿件的审稿质量进行分析,对审稿专家的对口程度进行了五个级别的分级,以及对审稿人认真审稿与否和对稿件提出的修改意见进行量化分析。结果显示,95%的专家审稿质量较高,特别是对口程度高的同行专家,对文稿的学术质量评价较为准确,能够提出关键性的修改意见。这是主编及编辑部决定文稿是否刊用以及在整期杂志中所处位置的重要依据。还有5%的专家审稿质量较差,这与专业对口程度不高有关,也与审稿人的敬业程度和专业素养不高有关。在学科分支不断细化深入的发展趋势下,编辑部最好选择次级学科也就是"充分对口"和"完全对口"的专家审稿。文稿修回后执行主编和编辑部仍需再次通览全文,对其学术质量与文字规范化进行最后的终审把关,并对参考文献的引用出处再次认真复核,以保证文稿的整体学术水准。
The review comments on 168 manuscripts submitted to Chinese Journal of Otology between 2010 and 2011 were analyzed. Academic field appropriateness was ranked to 5 levels and quality of review comments and sugges- tions were addressed in a quantitative manner. Data indicate that 95% of review comments were of high quality. Experts from the same or related academic field were able to make accurate and relevant comments on tbe quality of manuscripts and provide important suggestions, which served as an important basis for the Editor in Chief and editing staff in making decisions on publication and the position of a particular paper in the issue. In about 5% of reviews, the quality was less than ideal, which often resulted from field mismatch hut might also be related to the professionalism and knowledge base of the reviewer. Given the trend of continuing branching and specialization in the field of otology, the journal should strive fnr ＂sufficient＂ or ＂complete＂ field appropriateness when selecting reviewing experts. The executive editor and office staff musl also read through the manuscript multiple times to ensure the appropriateness and accuracy of its academic contents and language, as well as its literature citations and overall quality.
出处
《中华耳科学杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2012年第3期325-329,共5页
Chinese Journal of Otology
关键词
专业对口程度分级
中华耳科学杂志
审稿意见
审稿人
Chinese Journal of Otology
review comments
manuscript reviewer
academie field appropriateness
