Journal info (provided by editor)

% accepted last year
n/a
% immediately rejected last year
n/a
Articles published last year
n/a
Manuscripts received last year
n/a
Open access status
n/a
Manuscript handling fee
n/a

Impact factors (provided by editor)

Two-year impact factor
n/a
Five-year impact factor
n/a

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

Duration of manuscript handling phases

Duration first review round
7.7 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
9.7 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
1.7 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
3.3 / 5.0 (moderate)
Average number of review reports
2.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.7 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
2.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 69.4 weeks. Overall rating: 0 (very bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
We received no notice over 17 months about this submission, although it seemed (inside the authors login) that several reviewers had agreed to review. We emailed multiple contacts at Springer Nature including sending a hard copy letter to BMC offices in London. Eventually we received an email saying that the editor withdrew our paper saying "Your submission entitled "XXX", which you submitted to BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth was found to be unsuitable for publication. A thorough assessment showed that the paper contains issues, including but not limited to: Poor contribution to the field, unclear definition of problem or methodological issues, insufficient arguments, lack of focus, or did not meet our ethical standards. It has therefore been removed from our system. The factors taken into consideration in arriving at our decision to withdraw your paper do not allow us to offer an opportunity for resubmission or appeal." We could not see how our paper was "Poor contribution to the field, unclear definition of problem or methodological issues, insufficient arguments, lack of focus, or did not meet our ethical standards" because BMC published our very similar paper in 2023. We asked for the reviews that underpinned this 'withdrawal'- note that it was not 'rejected' - but had no response. I suspect that there were no reviewers reports and they wanted to get rid of it. In addition, this journal says they can pass on to other Springer Nature journals without full resubmission but this was not offered to us. In addition, I have had one publication that went through well but 4 other poor experiences with this journal, including bad experiences reviewing for them; no response to pointing out misleading results in a publication; and a violation of our copyright that they eventually denied they had authorised. Also another experience of paper being rejected, I'll submit that separately. Overall, I do not recommend this journal