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
2.9 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
3.4 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
1.8 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
2.8 / 5.0 (moderate)
Average number of review reports
2.4 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.9 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
3.6 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 8.9 weeks. Overall rating: 1 (bad). Outcome: Drawn back.

Motivation:
Quality of reviews was averaged as one external reviewer was excellent, however, the second reviewer was very bad - their review contained errors, false information, no references to back up their comments and asked for additional information/data that was completely irrelevant to our study. The flaws in the second review were raised with the editor who refused to seek a third reviewer or investigate further. Extremely disappointed with the second reviewer and the editors handling of our manuscript. We decided to publish in another journal.