Beispiel aus der Immunologie

Hier sehen Sie einen Auszug zu dem gewählten Fachbereich. Der Text für das Standard Lektorat wurden unter Berücksichtigung des Zweifaches Lektorats bearbeitet. Bitte wählen Sie zur unterschiedlichen Ansicht den entsprechenden Service aus. Für das gesamte Dokument nutzen Sie bitte die Downloadfunktion auf der rechten Seite.

Standard Lektorat
Erweitertes Lektorat

Original Datei

Beispiel aus der Immunologie, lektorat beispiel

Bearbeitete Datei

Beispiel aus der Immunologie, lektorat beispiel

Remarks

Remark 1:
Please check if this statement should be added in the Methods section as it provides details regarding the number of participants. Please revise accordingly.

Remark 2:
There seems to be a discrepancy in the number of subjects mentioned individually and the total number of subjects mentioned earlier. Please check.

Remark 3:
Please check if this abbreviation should be defined.

Remark 4:
The original sentence was not clear; hence, it has been edited heavily. Please check if the edited version conveys the intended meaning.

Explanations

	[Explanation1]: Language: This sentence has been edited for better readability.
	[Explanation2]: Grammar: Here, the subject “chronic use” is singular, so the verb should also be singular (is).
	[Explanation3]: Language: “unknown” is a concise expression.
	[Explanation4]: Language: Here, “effectiveness” is a better word than “impact.”
	[Explanation5]: Language: “Non-surgical” is a more appropriate term than “non-surgery.”
	[Explanation6]: Organization: A remark about the appropriateness of the sentence is addressed to the author asking him to consider replacing the sentence in the most appropriate position for orderly flow of information.
	[Explanation7]: Style: A normal edit will ensure that all abbreviations are defined at first mention and then used consistently throughout the text and artwork.
	[Explanation8]: Content consistency: A remark is addressed to the author, asking him to the clarify the discrepancy in the number of subjects mentioned individually and the total number of subjects mentioned earlier.
	[Explanation9]: Format: In this case, the journal style indicates the use of “wk” as the abbreviation for week when used as a unit of measurement.
	[Explanation10]: Journal style: Abbreviation not spelled out at the first mention is brought to the author’s notice using a remark.
	[Explanation11]: Language: The sentences have been converted from passive to active voice for better readability.
	[Explanation12]: Grammar: The preposition has been corrected.
	[Explanation13]: Language: We would query the author about such a rewrite to ensure that we have not changed the meaning.

Original Datei

Beispiel aus der Immunologie, lektorat beispiel

Bearbeitete Datei

Beispiel aus der Immunologie, lektorat beispiel

Remarks

Remark 1:
There seems to be a discrepancy in the number of subjects mentioned individually and the total number of subjects mentioned earlier. This change has been made to ensure consistency in data.

Remark 2:
The original sentence was not clear; hence, it has been edited heavily. Please check if the revision conveys the intended meaning.

Explanations

	[Explanation1]: Technical word choice: The term “infectious complications” is better and precise from the subject area viewpoint compared with “complications that are infective.”
	[Explanation2]: Language: Sentence construction has been corrected and made concise for better flow and transition and phrase choice. Also, subject-verb disagreement is corrected (is/are), and English word choice has been rectified (not known/unknown).
	[Explanation3]: Enhanced word choice: Here “performed” is used based on the technical context.
	[Explanation4]: Subject area: “Condition” and “status” mean the same. Therefore, the more appropriate term “status” is used for both terms to ensure consistency and clarity.
	[Explanation5]: Technical word choice: “Non-surgical” is a more appropriate technical term than “non-surgery.”
	[Explanation6]: Structural Change: This sentence belongs to the Methods section. We have therefore included it in that section.
	[Explanation7]: Style: A substantive edit will ensure that all abbreviations are defined at first mention and then used consistently throughout the text and artwork.
	[Explanation8]: Content consistency: Note that the number of subjects listed individually does not correspond to the total number of subjects mentioned earlier. Therefore, the appropriate change has been made and the author informed of the change.
	[Explanation9]: Journal style: In this case, the journal style indicates the use of “wk” as the abbreviation for “week” when used as a unit of measurement.
	[Explanation10]: Subject area: Parameters has a specific mathematical meaning; variables is accurate here.
	[Explanation11]: Technical word choice: Note that “IGF-1” is the abbreviation for “insulin-like growth factor-I.” This term has been added for further clarity to readers.
	[Explanation12]: Technical clarity: Presenting all the changes in Group IEEF in one sentence enhances readability and conciseness.
	[Explanation13]: Style: Note that the abbreviation is defined at its first mention in the text.
	[Explanation14]: Language: “IEEF” has been deleted to avoid redundancy and for better readability.
	[Explanation15]: Subject area: We have moved the emphasis to the result (“The B-cell fraction increased”) by deleting the text “an increase was observed.”
	[Explanation16]: Journal style: A substantive edit ensures that all abbreviations are defined at their first instance in the text.
	[Explanation17]: Language: We query the author about such a rewrite to ensure that we have not changed the meaning. Therefore, a remark has been added.

Die im Beispieldokument aufgeführten Erläuterungen zu vorgenommenen Änderungen dienen ausschließlich der Veranschaulichung. Üblicherweise werden derartige Erläuterungen nicht in lektorierten Dokumenten aufgeführt.