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
3.4 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
4.7 months
Decision time immediate rejection
10 days
Average number of review rounds
1.7 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
2.8 / 5.0 (moderate)
Average number of review reports
2.5 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.5 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
3.1 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 40.0 weeks. Overall rating: 0 (very bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
Our experience submitting to this journal was extremely disappointing. The review process suffered from massive delays with no communication or justification for the hold-up. The first reviewer’s comments were completely irrelevant, highly likely intended for a different paper! While the second focused bizarrely on ethical considerations, despite our submission being purely technical. It was painfully clear the reviewers had not read the manuscript!!! The vague, generic wording strongly suggested the use of Chatgpt rather than a proper review. This alarming lack of rigour seriously undermines the journal’s credibility. Never submit to this journal or waste your time!