|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|
|Aging and Mental Health||10.7
|Motivation: My manuscript used a qualitative methodology that, while well tested and reported on in previous literature, is not well understood outside of experts in the field. Although some qualitative research has been accepted to this journal it was clear that the reviewers were not well versed in qualitative research. Some comments by the reviewers were clearly hastily written--for example one reviewer objected to my using names for fear of disclosing PHI while the manuscript clearly stated pseudonyms were given.
Despite all of this I was impressed with how quickly the editor sent the paper out for review. Had this been a quantitative study it may have received fairer reviews. I will consider submitting to this journal in the future.