Latest review
First review round: 3.7 weeks. Overall rating: 0 (very bad).
Outcome: Rejected.
Motivation:
Deeply disappointed by our experience with this journal. We had one reviewer who provided very brief feedback, all of which were easily addressed, but did not provide any clear reason for rejection. The second review was extremely limited and gave strong signs of being AI generated. It was very basic and included tips such as "please report all abbreviations in full throughout the whole manuscript" (why?) and "please add a section about strengths and limitations". (There was already a section titled strengths and limitations in the discussion section). The reviews gave no indication as to why the paper had been rejected.
As a researcher, I am well accustomed to paper rejections, but this was a very disappointing encounter. I doubt we will submit to them again.
