Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
13.0 weeks
15.0 weeks
n/a
6 reports
Accepted
2025
Motivation:
This was supposed to be a simple 2,000 word case report. It did not require 6 reviewers and comments - the most ridiculous practice I have ever seen for a journal with a relatively low impact factor. Only two reviewers needed max. One of the 6 reviewers used AI to complete the review, as there were comments that didn't apply to the manuscript. I will not be submitting to this journal again, way too much work the type of journal and impact factor.
9.6 weeks
20.3 weeks
n/a
5 reports
Accepted
2025
Motivation:
We valued the multiple reviewers on the initial submission. Having more than 2 reviewers with multiple perspectives is a distinct advantage in revising and strengthening the paper. Addressing one reviewers comments for a second resubmission was also valuable. Turn around time is lengthy, but we understand the workload and demands on the journal.
5.0 weeks
7.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2025
Motivation:
The review process and the assistance with blinding were both handled well. The reviewers were knowledgeable and gave constructive criticism.
11.7 weeks
16.7 weeks
n/a
5 reports
Accepted
2024
Motivation:
Having five reviewers was quite helpful. While this resulted in many comments to address, the quality and breadth of the reviewer comments helped strengthen the final submission. The overall experience will help us in future submissions.
4.0 weeks
7.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2024
Motivation:
Although a little slow in the beginning (who is not??!) the editors were very responsive and I think the review process was excellent.
56.9 weeks
56.9 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2023
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation:
Very superficial rejection after only one day