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
Preventive Medicine n/a n/a 9.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Mycological Progress 17.0
weeks
26.4
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
2
(moderate)
Accepted
Nature Genetics n/a n/a 0.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
PLoS ONE 5.7
weeks
8.1
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: Overall the process was smooth, however the single review was a disappointment.
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment n/a n/a 41.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Waiting 41 days to hear that the manuscript did not even pass the first evaluation is shocking. I can accept that the editor feels the manuscript was out of the scope, but if that's the case, surely this can be detected in less than 41 days. This is an unacceptable waste of time for the authors and for the scientific community.
ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces 6.7
weeks
8.7
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
African Affairs n/a n/a 9.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Desk rejects are always disappointing, but they provided a paragraph to state the reasons and suggested which kind of journals they think are more suited.
BMC Veterinary Research 26.0
weeks
49.6
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Fungal Diversity n/a n/a 5.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Acoustical Science and Technology 8.7
weeks
8.7
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: It was "accept as is".
Nucleic Acids Research 4.0
weeks
10.3
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
2
(moderate)
Rejected
Journal of Bacteriology 4.1
weeks
5.6
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Scientific Reports 7.3
weeks
7.3
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
1
(bad)
Rejected
BBA General Subjects n/a n/a 29.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Plant and Soil 11.9
weeks
11.9
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
2
(moderate)
Rejected
PLoS ONE n/a n/a 20.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
PLoS ONE 7.4
weeks
7.4
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Microbial Ecology 8.4
weeks
9.1
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Phytochemistry 5.4
weeks
13.9
weeks
n/a 1 2
(moderate)
2
(moderate)
Accepted
Mycological Progress 4.6
weeks
10.0
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted
ISME Journal n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Environmental Microbiology 6.1
weeks
9.7
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Acoustical Science and Technology 5.9
weeks
5.9
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: They returned the decision letter very quickly. The decision letter made it very clear which points need to be fixed, and which points can be ignored.
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 10.4
weeks
10.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Motivation: The submission was for Express Letters category. I am disappointed that the decision was reject, but the reviews were fair. I revised the paper for a different journal which is more descriptively oriented, and it was eventually accepted.
Ecology Letters n/a n/a 0.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: The answer came exactly three hours after submission
ISME Journal 7.4
weeks
14.9
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Molecular Ecology n/a n/a 9.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Nature Medicine n/a n/a 6.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: The review process is fast. Even though the manuscript is rejected by editors directly, the response from the editor is quite reasonable and convincing.
Nature Communications 10.1
weeks
10.1
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Rejected
Motivation: The review process is quite long. The editor decided to send out the manuscript for review after two weeks upon initial submission. We received the comments from reviewers 8 weeks later. It seems that the whole process is time consuming and the manuscript tracking system is clumsy.
Terra Nova 4.3
weeks
4.3
weeks
n/a 2 1
(bad)
0
(very bad)
Drawn back
Journal of Differential Geometry 20.6
weeks
20.6
weeks
n/a 0 n/a 2
(moderate)
Rejected
Motivation: Taking nearly 6 months to reject a paper without even a referee report seems ridiculous to me.
Mathematische Annalen 25.1
weeks
25.1
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Geometric and Functional Analysis 2.3
weeks
2.3
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
5
(excellent)
Rejected
Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik 38.9
weeks
38.9
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Rejected
International Mathematics Research Notices 10.6
weeks
12.3
weeks
n/a 1 2
(moderate)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Manuscripta Mathematica 17.6
weeks
29.4
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Central European Journal of Mathematics 15.3
weeks
15.3
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Journal of Algebraic Geometry 1.7
weeks
1.7
weeks
n/a 2 1
(bad)
4
(very good)
Rejected
Mathematische Annalen n/a n/a 1.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Clinics and Research in Hepatology and Gastroenterology 5.9
weeks
8.0
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: Takes a bit of time from submission to allocation of manuscript number but very quick review and response