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
5.3 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
7.4 months
Decision time immediate rejection
9 days
Average number of review rounds
2.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
4.0 / 5.0 (difficult)
Average number of review reports
3.8 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.4 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
3.2 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 50.1 weeks. Overall rating: 1 (bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
The review process took an obscenely long time and resulted in rejection. It was not only a matter of difficulties in finding reviewers but the paper sat with the editor and administrators for 2-3 months at different points in the process. Many comments received may be helpful in improving the text for re-submission elsewhere. Others were outright rude or seemed to overlook the fact that the excessively long review process contributed to making our study outdated.