BMC Public Health

Journal info (provided by editor)

The editor of BMC Public Health has not yet provided information for this page.

Space for journal cover image
Issues per year
Articles published last year
Manuscripts received last year
% accepted last year
% immediately rejected last year
Open access status
Manuscript handling fee?
Kind of complaint procedure
Two-year impact factor
Five-year impact factor
Disciplines: Public health

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

SciRev ratings (provided by authors) (based on 11 reviews)

Duration of manuscript handling phases
Duration first review round 4.0 mnths compare →
Total handling time accepted manuscripts 6.3 mnths compare →
Decision time immediate rejection 5 days compare →
Characteristics of peer review process
Average number of review reports 2.2 compare →
Average number of review rounds 1.9 compare →
Quality of review reports 3.1 compare →
Difficulty of reviewer comments 2.9 compare →
Overall rating manuscript handling 2.4 (range 0-5) compare →

Latest review

First review round: 21.7 weeks. Overall rating: 1 (bad). Outcome: Rejected.

My experience is in accordance with other reviews here. The review process is very slow and the communication with the journal is not good. Our submitted manuscript was sent for peer review and we received reports after 5 months. We resubmitted the revised manuscript within 2.5 weeks addressing all the comments. We felt that one reviewer report was very professional, the other reviewer was not experienced in the field. Afterwards, something surprising happened. We received comments from two _new_ reviewers. Their comments requested the exact opposite as the first two reviewers. Our manuscript was rejected. I would not submit here again. It is a waste of time with poor communication. I may add that our manuscript was sent back once randomly: a person in the editorial office hit the wrong button (and apologized for it). I would not recommend BMC Public Health.