Journal title
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
26.0 weeks
39.1 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
4
Accepted
8.0 weeks
8.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
26.0 weeks
32.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Accepted
Motivation: First review process took to long
13.0 weeks
21.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
8.7 weeks
10.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: Some of the reviews were useful, some not..
8.7 weeks
10.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
2
Accepted
Motivation: My may concer about to this manuscript and this Journal is that I received an extra reviewer report by a new reviewer after resubmit the paper revised according to the comments of the two first reviewers. Thus, the paper was published with a big delay time. More than one year.
5.0 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
62.1 weeks
88.2 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
4
Accepted
21.1 weeks
34.2 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
6.9 weeks
6.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
8.0 weeks
9.0 weeks
n/a
6 reports
4
5
Accepted
3.1 weeks
3.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
1
1
Rejected
9.6 weeks
10.6 weeks
n/a
4 reports
5
5
Accepted
8.4 weeks
10.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
2.7 weeks
3.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
4.4 weeks
7.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
7.6 weeks
9.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Immediately accepted after 8.7 weeks
Accepted (im.)
8.7 weeks
11.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
4.3 weeks
8.3 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
4
Accepted
7.6 weeks
8.1 weeks
n/a
5 reports
5
5
Accepted
5.0 weeks
9.0 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
4
Accepted
5.0 weeks
10.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
4
Accepted
4.0 weeks
11.0 weeks
n/a
4 reports
3
3
Rejected
7.9 weeks
10.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: The first reviews had not exactly grasped the subject of my paper, whereas this was more correctly appreciated after reading the revised version and the responses to the reviewers.
3.7 weeks
4.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Some methodological aspects of the study were not correct and the reviewers' suggestions were very useful
6.0 weeks
8.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: No additional comments. .
13.0 weeks
14.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
4
Accepted
13.0 weeks
13.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
6.7 weeks
16.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
3
Accepted
4.3 weeks
4.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
16.1 weeks
16.6 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
5
Accepted
13.3 weeks
14.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
5
Accepted
13.4 weeks
14.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
3
Accepted
5.9 weeks
10.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
8.7 weeks
10.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: The review process was fast and I have no complaints.
6.0 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: The reviewers of this journal were quite fast and also they were expert enough to analyse the quality of my paper
5.0 weeks
10.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
3
Accepted
13.0 weeks
14.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
13.0 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted