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
1.2 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
1.2 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
1.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
n/a
Average number of review reports
2.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
4.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
3.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 5.3 weeks. Overall rating: 3 (good). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
It took about a month for the journal to send it for peer review. On the positive side, they send you a personalised link where you can see how many reviewers accepted and how many have already sent their decision. Regarding the quality of the comments, they were generally good and well-founded. However, I am somewhat concerned that one of the reviewers suggested adding some references that many had in common with the same author, which indicates certain bad practices. Although, as the manuscript was rejected, I cannot say this with certainty.