投稿一篇文章，一审意见是大修，其中一位审稿人的意见如下：The authors describe the study as a retrospective observational study. However, the analysis of ＊＊＊ on days 3, 7 and 14 seems to suggest that the study was prospectively conducted. Or do the authors suggest that analysis of ＊＊＊ in patients with sepsis is a routine workup done at their Institute for all such patients? Seems very perplexing. The authors need to clarify.
我们这个是对之前一个临床观察性研究的回顾性再总结，没有伦理，该如何回复呢
如果审稿人再问要之前研究的伦理号，我该怎么办呢

 返回小木虫查看更多