heisfool

切，学生论文写不好，你们这些老师还好意思发上网来取笑人家，自己不害臊吗？怎么教书育人的？！

我5月初作为reviewer拒了一个国内的投给WHO Bulletin的论文。 一作国家行政学院，二作清华大学，都是博士，写的乱七八糟的一个关于中国烟草控制现状的论文，连基本的introduction， method，result，conclusion都写不好，前言不搭后语，大量的论点找不到citation。

最搞笑的是花国家的钱雇调查公司全国随机抽样3000户家庭，受访者80%来自城市，众所周知这是严重的selection bias，中国人大部分是农民，那作者解释说中国农村电话不普及，而且我们的研究证明那受访的20%农民是有代表性，然后列了个表算P-value，，算出来的数字没有adjust也就算了，他还算错了！ 95%的 CI也没列出来。 我的个天，这两牛逼人物是怎么混到博士的。

付下我回复给WHO Bulltin的据信 的第一部分：

The paper describes the public’s attitude and behavior towards cigarette tax and cigarette price increase in China, using survey methodology by stratified multi-stage random sampling telephone survey. Descriptive analysis and multiple variable logistic regression analysis were conducted. This paper is first of its kind to understand public’s support for cigarette tax increase in a developing nation. Though, this manuscript adds to the scientific literature about tobacco control in the developing countries, it lacks quality, proper scientific writing, adequate survey methodology, proper data results interpretation and finally sufficient discussion, conclusion and appropriate references.
Additionally, sample size for this quantitative data analysis is highly questionable. Moreover, linearity, normality of the data analysis is also questionable. The sample size of 730 current smokers and understanding their attitudes and intentions cannot be generalized to a nation which harbors about one-third of the world’s current smokers.
This manuscript is more like an internal or country- wide report. Hence, considering all the efforts that the authors took in writing this manuscript and the importance of the research, I make a decision to “REJECT” the manuscript because of the above and below reasons and comments.

heisfool

大学教授水平差80年代那时候的我估计就不行了。  当初俺舅舅在华中科技大学，那时候还是华中工学院读书，81年入学的，瞧不起他们学院大部分的老师，还当众骂过一个教授狗屁不懂，靠政治上位。 然后大四保研的时候被这帮孙子叫兽阴了，一直以为自己是被保研的，到快毕业了才听说被刷下来了。然后没有回头路了，自己想办法去美国留学了。