2021-12-30

Introduction should outline the difficulties you want to address and the questions you want to answer, summarizing existing research and gaps in knowledge

2021-12-30

The introduction is considered as the state of knowledge before your research, while the conclusion is the state of knowledge after the research

2021-12-27

How to write an introduction? Different from discussion?

2021-12-26

The difference between introduction and discussion?

2020-09-08

Do you know if this journal accepts case reports?

2019-09-12

The first SCI article was accepted after two major revisions and a major revision. It took 6 months. Let me share the process! After submitting the paper, I waited for two months and received major revision. The editor asked more than 20 questions, all of which are the formatting problems and not difficult to answer. The strange thing was that of four reviewers, one who posed the questions which extremely difficult to answer, was the first person recognizing the content of the article. The others gave short comments and their evaluations were not very good. After answering these 60 questions (yes, it was exactly 60 which made me cry and add experiments), I waited for a month in a panic. It was major revision again, but the questions were obviously milder and the answers were smoother. In the last month minor revision was required. It was accepted smoothly after returning. Let me talk about your feelings! At the beginning I was about to collapse when I saw the 60 questions. The word count of the reply letters was higher than the manuscript. I always thought that as long as my first submission was not rejected, the editor should still be interested. It will be easier to be successful with proper revision and the correct attitude. In addition, the editor of this journal is really nice!

2019-09-12

The first sci, underwent two major revisions and one minor revision before being accepted. It took 6 months in total. Let's talk about the process! After submitting the paper, waited for two months for major revision. The editor raised more than 20 questions, but they were all about formatting and not difficult to answer. Strangely, after consulting with four editors, one of them asked very difficult questions, but he was the first expert to affirm the content of the article. The rest of the editors just made brief comments, and the feedback was not very positive. After answering all 60 (yes, 60) questions, including additional experiments, waited nervously for another month for another major revision, which was milder in terms of questions and smoother in terms of responses. Another month later, there was a minor revision, and the paper was accepted smoothly. Share your thoughts! At first, seeing 60 questions was really overwhelming, the reply letter was longer than the main text, and I always thought as long as the first draft is not rejected, the editor probably still wants it, so revise it well with a proper attitude, and it will be easier to get through. Also, this editor is really nice!

2017-11-27

Review Speed: 3.0 Experience Sharing: This was my first submission to this journal, an article on parasitic epidemiology survey. I submitted it with a trial attitude and was surprised to receive minor revisions and an acceptance within one month. I feel that as long as the sample size is large enough, it is quite good to write about your own characteristics in the discussion of epidemiological articles

2017-07-18

The past was good, but the current decline is quite scary. I hope to get back to a 3-point level next year, but it may be really difficult

2016-05-23

Review Speed: 2.0 | Submission Success Rate: 95.0
Sharing Experience: This is my second submission. The reviewers are very professional. The parasitic old magazine requires solid experiments, not necessarily cutting-edge experimental techniques