SCI修回求助

投稿1年时间，期间修回2次，第一次修回是去年6月份，2个专家意见，修回去后专家很肯定，无新意见。1月份又修回，增加1个专家意见，还是仔细修回。修回去没几天，主编来信，提出以下无法回答问题。

1. Not clear how the sample was selected. The authors state that it is from " standard medical screening programme run by a health management institution in Beijing, China" . This is a main limitation, how representative the sample is, what is the impact on the findings? Is the sample representative of Beijing? Here where the comparison to IHME data from Beijing would be ideal.

Reply: Thanks for stating the key point. More information has been provided on this issue. From January to December 2013, a cross-sectional survey was conducted in an ongoing standard medical screening programme run by a health management institution in Beijing, China. Inclusion criteria for participation in this cross-sectional study were: (1) aged 16 years or older, (2) located in Beijing, China. In order to encourage participation, all participants were offered a small gift following data collection. A total of 6576 people were recruited, among which 5669 subjects (3344 men and 2325 women), completing the questionnaires, were included in our study. The response rate was 86.2%. Because the current study included the collection of data from a relatively large population, we think the sample was representative.

我的样本来自北京某体检中心数据，之前有专家提出意见，做如上回答，但编辑不认可，又提出样本选择问题。我是将1年内体检中心数据全部纳入，因为里面很多测量指标，没有经费免费做体检。所以就借助样本进行问卷调查数据。现在编辑又一次提出这个意见，如何回答能让其满意？