All reviews received by SciRev

Journal title Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
(click to go to journal page) 1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome
Hematology n/a n/a 9.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Journal of Infection n/a n/a 1.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology n/a n/a 5.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Very quick response, encouraging us to pursue a more fitting journal for our paper
PLoS ONE 2.7
weeks
5.0
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: The process was quick, the reviewers were focused and their remarks contributed to the paper.
The communication with the editor was very swift and pleasant.
Nature n/a n/a 10.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Rejection without review in Nature is now shame. However, after 10 days of editorial evaluation I would appreciate at least a brief comment on my manuscript.
Netherlands Journal of Medicine n/a n/a 13.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Although the reason for rejection was not entirely accurate, the fast time to first decision is good
Netherlands Journal of Medicine n/a n/a 2.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Fast rejection time for case reports
Spinal Cord Series and Cases 5.3
weeks
6.7
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: Reasonably fast review process.
Reasonable comments by reviewer.
European Journal of Internal Medicine n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Reasonably fast rejection time without peer reviewing, thus minimizing the lost time before submitting to another journal.
Internal Medicine 13.9
weeks
13.9
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: It took 2 months for the editors to find reviewers willing to review the paper.
While the report of the first reviewer was detailed with many suggestions, the report of the second reviewer was very short and dismissive.
3 months of waiting is a considerable amount of time only to have the paper rejected.
Infection n/a n/a 2.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Very fast time to rejection of the case report submitted
Emergency Medicine Journal 0.7
weeks
0.7
weeks
n/a 1 2
(moderate)
4
(very good)
Rejected
Motivation: Very fast review process (comments from reviewers and first decision after about just 1 month)
Journal of Neuroscience Methods 3.0
weeks
6.6
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Applied Physics Letters 6.0
weeks
10.0
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Accepted
Motivation: Although the manuscript was eventually accepted, the revision process took too long. I understand the topic was new, but it took them a month to accept my revised manuscript despite the fact that the revisions were very minor.
Applied Physics Letters 2.6
weeks
2.9
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: This was a quick and high-quality peer-review process.
Applied Physics Letters 3.7
weeks
5.4
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: The reviewer comments were extremely helpful although it took them more than ten days to accept the revised manuscript.
IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices 5.6
weeks
9.7
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: One reviewer (out of three) has apparently not read the manuscript. Other reviewer reports were somewhat helpful.
Journal of Medical Systems n/a n/a 6.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Pakistan Development Review n/a n/a 63.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Mathematical Finance n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Fast rejection, no reason given.
World Development n/a n/a 6.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Demography n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
ACS Macro Letters 11.1
weeks
11.4
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Advanced Materials 3.0
weeks
3.1
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Scientific Reports 9.3
weeks
15.9
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Accepted
Motivation: The review process took a long time relative to other journals of similar quality. At each stage the manuscript had to pass through a quality check that significantly delayed the review process and required all or most of the files to be uploaded again.
Materials Characterization 7.0
weeks
8.7
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
3
(good)
Rejected
Journal of Materials Science 6.0
weeks
6.0
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
3
(good)
Rejected
Materials Science and Engineering, A: Structural Materials: Properties, Microstructure and Processing n/a n/a 0.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Rejuvenation Research 4.0
weeks
4.0
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Journal of Alloys and Compounds 15.7
weeks
17.6
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Accepted
Motivation: In my opinion, the review process took too long. After almost four months of "under review" status, I contacted the editor asking what was going on. The reviews were sent to me about a week after my query, so it seems it was necessary to ask the editor to urge the reviewers. Received reviews were very accurate and it was clear the reviewers read and reviewed the manuscript carefully. The publishing process after acceptance was quick and well managed.
Mechanisms of Ageing and Development 3.3
weeks
11.0
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Aging n/a n/a 4.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: The process was fast which is good. On the other hand the manuscript has been invited which made this decision to reject without review very surprising.
Aging n/a n/a 1.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Biogerontology 1.9
weeks
2.1
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Biogerontology 4.6
weeks
4.6
weeks
n/a 2 1
(bad)
3
(good)
Rejected
Parasitology Research 8.9
weeks
9.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: 2 months for a first response
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 8.7
weeks
9.7
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Natural Product Research 4.7
weeks
6.9
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
4
(very good)
Accepted
International Journal for Parasitology n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Journal of Financial Econometrics 25.4
weeks
25.4
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
2
(moderate)
Rejected
Motivation: Reviewing process was too long for a relatively straightforward rejection.