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
n/a
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
n/a
Decision time immediate rejection
2 days
Average number of review rounds
n/a
Difficulty of reviewer comments
n/a
Average number of review reports
n/a

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
n/a
Overall rating manuscript handling
n/a

Latest review

Outcome: Rejected (im.).

Motivation:
The review process appeared subjective and, in my view, did not reflect the level of professionalism typically expected in academic peer review. I would expect greater transparency, professionalism, and consistency in the editorial process.